What cables are you using in your system ?????

[DaveC]

Well the engineers at Neotech really did a good job designing the Amazon and the Sahara which is their top of the line rectangular OCC cable line.

I agree, they are exceptional cables! I still prefer my new round-wire IC cable though. My now discontinued DSR and VolkSilver VSI cables are rectangular and are really good, but for the reasons I stated in the previous post I like round for ICs. The VSI is rectangular as it uses the same wire as my SC and PC and thus benefits from economies of scale, it allows me to offer a UPOCC silver/teflon cable starting at under $1k.

I've bought wire from Neotech for over 10 years now, even have some of my wire custom made by Neotech. I have a lot of respect for their products and engineering. There's advantages to building cables by hand in some case, I have the flexibility to customize to a greater extent. I can use materials and geo that are difficult if not impossible to incorporate into a machine made cable. Our design philosophies are similar but I stick more to trying to offer a simple cable that is objectively good for a reasonable price. They get pretty fancy with some of their designs and incorporate more subjective elements. Often I have no clue how a cable will sound before a prototype is made, I just know it will be a better cable in some objective measure like dielectric absorption, triboelectric noise, damping, etc. So far in over 10 years objective improvements always lead to subjective preferences. Also, machine made cables are indeed superior for some types of cable, which is why I don't offer ethernet or HDMI cables, these need to be precision manufactured to tight specs to work at all. If people want these cables I usually suggest and can order them a Furutech or Neotech machine made cable.

 

[treitz3]

Ted who are you to be so demeaning to the forum members here?

Ted you’re digging your own grave!

Agreed. It's his foxhole he dug. Let him hang out with the folks he wishes to be with, within said foxhole.

Tom

 

[DaveC]

Maybe stay in your little sandbox unless you really want the few customers you have comparing your products to mine. That doesn’t seem like a smart move to me.

I want and encourage such comparisons. You will lose out a vast majority of the time. I know this because I have had my customers compare my cables to SR many, many times. My demo to sale rate is around 95%, and I offer a superior cable at a better value than you do because I focus on objective superiority rather than bling and tweaks. I have less overhead and I don't pay for marketing or reviews. SR is a tweak company. I've heard your demos and while they change the sound, they do not improve the sound.

 

[Ted Denney III]

Ted Dennehy lll,
I respect your company synergy research you guys make some good stuff but you're using 6N silver which can be edgy and bright and it will be nowhere near as good as OCC single crystal silver which is 7n pure and each crystal is 125 m long and the new rectangular OCC single crystal silver is even better than the round I've talked to your company and you guys haven't even thought about trying the rectangular OCC copper and silver.

We use monocrystalline silver conductors in an air dielectric geometry, handmade in my SoCal factory, in the thousand-dollar price range with Foundation SX and Foundation XL. However, you are incorrect about silver ribbon foil conductors. SRX power cords are a handmade ribbon foil laminate, again, also hand crafted in my Southern California factory. But conductor compositions, materials, even geometries are the easy part. Through UEF Tech, we interact with the electromagnetic field itself, which is how signal propagates. It seems many have their heads stuck in Ohm’s law. Break out of that; it’s a jail cell.

https://www.synergisticresearch.com/cables/foundation-sx/

https://www.synergisticresearch.com/cables/foundation-xl/

 

[Ted Denney III]

I want and encourage such comparisons. You will lose out a vast majority of the time. I know this because I have had my customers compare my cables to SR many, many times. My demo to sale rate is around 95%, and I offer a superior cable at a better value than you do because I focus on objective superiority rather than bling and tweaks. I have less overhead and I don't pay for marketing or reviews. SR is a tweak company. I've heard your demos and while they change the sound, they do not improve the sound.

You are correct. Let’s get in contact off of the forum— check your inbox. I’ll need a complete loom of your cables, where I’ll put them head-to-head against Foundation SX, no idea what your cables cost, but Foundation SX are very affordable under around $1000. Or if your cables are very expensive, Foundation XL. I feel confident that we will perform well in this match up. I’ll put the video up on YouTube; this will be tremendous publicity for your company and I’ll make the high resolution files available for people to download and compare the difference between your cables and mine. I think this is a great idea, and I’m glad you thought of it. Mazel tov!

 

[DaveC]

We use monocrystalline silver conductors in an air dielectric geometry, handmade in my SoCal factory, in the thousand-dollar price range. However, you are incorrect about silver ribbon foil conductors. SRX power cords are a handmade ribbon foil laminate, again, also hand crafted in my Southern California factory. But conductor compositions, materials, even geometries are the easy part. Through UEF Tech, we interact with the electromagnetic field itself, which is how signal propagates. It seems many have their heads stuck in Ohm’s law. Break out of that; it’s a jail cell.

https://www.synergisticresearch.com/cables/foundation-sx/

Air dielectric leads to corroded wire. Sounds good at first, but I think gear should be designed to last a lifetime. This is why nobody in any other industry uses "air dielectric". This is why plating, conformal coatings, etc. exist. High End audio is full of people without proper training or experience to design their own products. Cables shouldn't corrode, and they should be designed to be bent back and forth many, many times. It's very common to see neither of these design considerations addressed. FWIW, I'm I am a degreed engineer with manufacturing experience.

I’ll need a complete loom of your cables...

Now THIS deserves a laugh emoji! So does your comment on Ohm's law. To me, your design and remarks would disqualify your products from consideration.

IDK why you're being so angry and aggressive, Ted?! Calm down, nobody here has done anything to provoke your anger.

 

[DaveC]

Dave, what happens when silver oxidizes?

Also, I guess this is a no?

I'm absolutely sure you have no idea what happens when silver oxidizes. If you did, you would not make cables with an air dielectric. Your cables will corrode into sulphides and oxides of silver. It will make your cables sound harsh over time. You are a great example of someone who is unqualified to design the products you sell, and I feel bad for your customers who bought your corroding cables.

You are a classless, angry person. I feel really bad for you, Ted. I can only imagine how horrible and angry you must feel right now to write what you have and for sharing PRIVATE messages publicly. With the best of intent, may I suggest seeing a counselor to help you with anger management?

Anyways, I'm out. You can continue to destroy your own reputation if you wish... I'd suggest you take some time off though. Have a friend read what you've wrote here and give you some honest feedback.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Just read your profile. Never heard of Zen wave audio. Are you new? Do you have a website?

Winning more customers I see. Your distribution should be worried about your posts. Please do not reply.

 

[Ted Denney III]

I'm absolutely sure you have no idea what happens when silver oxidizes. If you did, you would not make cables with an air dielectric. Your cables will corrode into sulphides and oxides of silver. It will make your cables sound harsh over time. You are a great example of someone who is unqualified to design the products you sell, and I feel bad for your customers who bought your corroding cables.

You are a classless, angry person. I feel really bad for you, Ted. I can only imagine how horrible and angry you must feel right now to write what you have and for sharing PRIVATE messages publicly. With the best of intent, may I suggest seeing a counselor to help you with anger management?

Anyways, I'm out. You can continue to destroy your own reputation if you wish... I'd suggest you take some time off though. Have a friend read what you've wrote here and give you some honest feedback.

Signal Propagation 101:

Teflon (PTFE) has a more detrimental effect on high-frequency electromagnetic propagation around a silver wire compared to pure silver with silver oxide (tarnish) in an air dielectric. Here’s why:

1. Dielectric Constant:
Air has a dielectric constant very close to 1, which is ideal for signal propagation. Teflon, while considered a low-loss material, has a higher dielectric constant of about 2.1. This higher dielectric constant can lead to increased signal loss and propagation delay compared to air.

2. Signal Loss:
Materials with higher dielectric constants (>4) exhibit greater signal losses and propagation delays compared to substrates with lower dielectric constants. While Teflon’s dielectric constant is relatively low, it’s still higher than air, leading to more signal loss.

3. Skin Effect and Surface Conductivity:
At high frequencies, current tends to flow near the surface of a conductor due to the skin effect. Silver oxide, unlike some other metal oxides, is conductive. This means that even if silver oxidizes, it may not significantly degrade signal transmission, especially in the audio frequency range.

4. Impedance and Reflections:
The difference in dielectric constants between air and the conductor surface (including any oxide layer) is smaller than the difference between Teflon and the conductor. This smaller difference in air dielectric systems can lead to less impedance mismatch and fewer reflections.

5. Energy Storage:
Dielectric materials can store electrical charges, which can hinder signal propagation. Air, being closer to a vacuum in its properties, stores less energy than Teflon, potentially allowing for better signal propagation.

6. Frequency Response:
Some audiophiles and cable manufacturers argue that air dielectric cables provide superior performance, especially in high-frequency applications, due to less signal alteration and time smearing.

While Teflon is widely used in high-frequency applications due to its low loss characteristics compared to many other solid dielectrics, an air dielectric (even with some silver oxide present) provides better performance for high-frequency electromagnetic propagation around a silver wire.

 

[Ted Denney III]

Winning for customers I see. Your distribution should be worried about your posts. Please do not reply.

Dave is a competitor, apparently. Not a customer. But I did answer the question, as to which cables I have in my home stereo. Which led to this kerfuffle.

 

[DaveC]

Signal Propagation 101:

Teflon (PTFE) has a more detrimental effect on high-frequency electromagnetic propagation around a silver wire compared to pure silver with silver oxide (tarnish) in an air dielectric. Here’s why:

1. Dielectric Constant:
Air has a dielectric constant very close to 1, which is ideal for signal propagation. Teflon, while considered a low-loss material, has a higher dielectric constant of about 2.1. This higher dielectric constant can lead to increased signal loss and propagation delay compared to air.

2. Signal Loss:
Materials with higher dielectric constants (>4) exhibit greater signal losses and propagation delays compared to substrates with lower dielectric constants. While Teflon’s dielectric constant is relatively low, it’s still higher than air, leading to more signal loss.

3. Skin Effect and Surface Conductivity:
At high frequencies, current tends to flow near the surface of a conductor due to the skin effect. Silver oxide, unlike some other metal oxides, is conductive. This means that even if silver oxidizes, it may not significantly degrade signal transmission, especially in the audio frequency range.

4. Impedance and Reflections:
The difference in dielectric constants between air and the conductor surface (including any oxide layer) is smaller than the difference between Teflon and the conductor. This smaller difference in air dielectric systems can lead to less impedance mismatch and fewer reflections.

5. Energy Storage:
Dielectric materials can store electrical charges, which can hinder signal propagation. Air, being closer to a vacuum in its properties, stores less energy than Teflon, potentially allowing for better signal propagation.

6. Frequency Response:
Some audiophiles and cable manufacturers argue that air dielectric cables provide superior performance, especially in high-frequency applications, due to less signal alteration and time smearing.

While Teflon is widely used in high-frequency applications due to its low loss characteristics compared to many other solid dielectrics, an air dielectric (even with some silver oxide present) provides better performance for high-frequency electromagnetic propagation around a silver wire.

Darn it Ted! Pulling me in!!! I only reply because what you wrote above on silver tarnishing is incorrect.

This is even more proof that you really don't have the technical background required to properly understand your own design choices. The material the conductor is in contact with can have a major effect on the sound, understanding this is a key aspect of cable design. You entered this thread ridiculing me and belittling my products. Ironic how it turned out that you proved that you are, in fact, not competent to design cables. For the owner and designer of a cable business to be so mistaken in his understanding on this subject is really unfortunate.

---------- -------------------- ---------------------

Ted doesn't know what the corrosion on his wire is. He thinks its Silver Oxide, but it's really Silver Sulphide. Oxidation of silver in air is extremely slow. The black tarnish on silver is Silver Sulphide, which is a semiconductor. So is Silver Oxide, it has conductivity MUCH lower than silver. Everything written in Ted's post above demonstrates a cursory, incomplete, or flawed view of the topic it addresses.

I probably looked this up 20 years ago, this is just reinventing the wheel to go into much detail. So instead of doing too much work, here's a good thread from 2001 for those who want more info, I refer to it because it's written by a chemist, I'm only an engineer so while I understand the process, I'm less of an expert on the subject than a chemist: tl;dr in the comment below:

"Hi Gomer,
Being a chemist; yes I completed my study at the University of Groningen back in 1973; I feel compelled to answer your question!
Silversulfide is a salt that forms when silver comes in contact with the gas hydrygensulfide; that gas being formed by rotten egs etc. A salt only conducts electricity by forming mobile carriers in this case ions when melted-at extreme high temperature- or dissolved in f.a. example water. Thus the sulfersulfide at the surface of a silver strand is NOT a good conductor of electricity.
Oxides the product formed by the chemical reaction of a metal with the oxigen in the air are also no good conductors as we all experienced bad (oxidized) connectors. The myth that silveroxide is a good conductor is brought in the world by Siltech the manafacturer of pure silver cables in my country. I belief they were afraid their cables being accused of bad conductivity over time.
Pure silver is the best conductor there is; copper a good second and much cheaper.
ELSO"

Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Audio Asylum - Audio Asylum Thread Printer - Get a view of an entire thread on one page

www.audioasylum.com

 

[zuesman]

lay off the bottle, its not good for you, you are making a complete ass out of yourself

Yes Ted I agree You're making a total *** of yourself if you own synergistic research then I don't have much respect for you as an owner, and I've been at this for over 40 years so I probably know more about cables than you ever will especially OCC single crystal since I used to rep for harmonic technology here in Vancouver Canada and that's why I know so much about Neotech as well because they're now the parent company of harmonic technology.

 

[treitz3]

And the hits just keep coming....

How low? Just how low? That's my only question. No one on this forum but a select few know exactly who this question is aimed at, but the question remains.

Being stubborn will not change things.

Tom

 

[Ted Denney III]

Darn it Ted! Pulling me in!!! I only reply because what you wrote above on silver tarnishing is incorrect.

This is even more proof that you really don't have the technical background required to properly understand your own design choices. The material the conductor is in contact with can have a major effect on the sound, understanding this is a key aspect of cable design. You entered this thread ridiculing me and belittling my products. Ironic how it turned out that you proved that you are, in fact, not competent to design cables. For the owner and designer of a cable business to be so mistaken in his understanding on this subject is really unfortunate.

---------- -------------------- ---------------------

Ted doesn't know what the corrosion on his wire is. He thinks its Silver Oxide, but it's really Silver Sulphide. Oxidation of silver in air is extremely slow. The black tarnish on silver is Silver Sulphide, which is a semiconductor. So is Silver Oxide, it has conductivity MUCH lower than silver. Everything written in Ted's post above demonstrates a cursory, incomplete, or flawed view of the topic it addresses.

I probably looked this up 20 years ago, this is just reinventing the wheel to go into much detail. So instead of doing too much work, here's a good thread from 2001 for those who want more info, I refer to it because it's written by a chemist, I'm only an engineer so while I understand the process, I'm less of an expert on the subject than a chemist: tl;dr in the comment below:

"Hi Gomer,
Being a chemist; yes I completed my study at the University of Groningen back in 1973; I feel compelled to answer your question!
Silversulfide is a salt that forms when silver comes in contact with the gas hydrygensulfide; that gas being formed by rotten egs etc. A salt only conducts electricity by forming mobile carriers in this case ions when melted-at extreme high temperature- or dissolved in f.a. example water. Thus the sulfersulfide at the surface of a silver strand is NOT a good conductor of electricity.
Oxides the product formed by the chemical reaction of a metal with the oxigen in the air are also no good conductors as we all experienced bad (oxidized) connectors. The myth that silveroxide is a good conductor is brought in the world by Siltech the manafacturer of pure silver cables in my country. I belief they were afraid their cables being accused of bad conductivity over time.
Pure silver is the best conductor there is; copper a good second and much cheaper.
ELSO"

Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Audio Asylum - Audio Asylum Thread Printer - Get a view of an entire thread on one page

www.audioasylum.com

Thank you for sharing your perspective. However, I must respectfully disagree with several points in your response, as they contain inaccuracies and unfounded personal attacks.

Firstly, your focus on the specific composition of silver tarnish misses the broader point about dielectric properties. While you’re correct that silver sulfide is more common than silver oxide in everyday environments, this distinction doesn’t invalidate the core argument about air versus Teflon dielectrics.

Your claim that I lack the technical background for cable design is both unfounded and irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It’s a classic ad hominem fallacy that attempts to discredit the argument by attacking the person rather than addressing the actual points raised.

The 2001 forum post you’ve cited, while interesting, is not a credible scientific source. It’s an informal, outdated discussion that doesn’t reflect current research or advancements in audio technology over the past two decades.

Your statement about my competence is not only unnecessarily personal but also demonstrates a logical fallacy known as the argument from authority. My points stand or fall on their own merits, not on your perception of my qualifications.
The core argument about air versus Teflon dielectrics remains valid and is based on well-established principles of electromagnetic theory. The lower dielectric constant of air compared to Teflon can indeed lead to less signal alteration in certain circumstances.

I’d encourage you to engage with the actual technical points raised, rather than resorting to personal attacks or outdated sources. A constructive dialogue based on current research and empirical evidence would be far more beneficial to the audio community.

Let’s focus on advancing our understanding of cable design through respectful, fact-based discussions. This approach serves everyone better and contributes to the collective knowledge in our field.

 

[treitz3]

Outdated attacks? Seriously? A fuse....sent from your own factory......that was PROVEN to come from your own factory, was dismissed as outdated. That same fuse, you stated was fake.....hmmm

Do I need to link the exact proof that it came from your factory?

I didn't say anything here other than the facts about that case but quit steamrolling and gaslighting the members here at the WBF.

Tom

 

[DaveC]

Thank you for sharing your perspective. However, I must respectfully disagree with several points in your response, as they contain inaccuracies and unfounded personal attacks.

Firstly, your focus on the specific composition of silver tarnish misses the broader point about dielectric properties. While you’re correct that silver sulfide is more common than silver oxide in everyday environments, this distinction doesn’t invalidate the core argument about air versus Teflon dielectrics.

Your claim that I lack the technical background for cable design is both unfounded and irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It’s a classic ad hominem fallacy that attempts to discredit the argument by attacking the person rather than addressing the actual points raised.

The 2001 forum post you’ve cited, while interesting, is not a credible scientific source. It’s an informal, outdated discussion that doesn’t reflect current research or advancements in audio technology over the past two decades.

Your statement about my competence is not only unnecessarily personal but also demonstrates a logical fallacy known as the argument from authority. My points stand or fall on their own merits, not on your perception of my qualifications.
The core argument about air versus Teflon dielectrics remains valid and is based on well-established principles of electromagnetic theory. The lower dielectric constant of air compared to Teflon can indeed lead to less signal alteration in certain circumstances.

I’d encourage you to engage with the actual technical points raised, rather than resorting to personal attacks or outdated sources. A constructive dialogue based on current research and empirical evidence would be far more beneficial to the audio community.

Let’s focus on advancing our understanding of cable design through respectful, fact-based discussions. This approach serves everyone better and contributes to the collective knowledge in our field.

THIS... was written by AI, wasn't it Ted? Don't lie, it's obvious.

 

[DaveC]

Should I post the AI detector results? While entertaining, can this possibly get any worse?


The tragic arc of Ted demeaning myself and my products to the ignorance on the subject of silver corrosion was spectacular, like a race car driver diving into the apex and going right off the track. But then, the AI generated reply is comedy gold. This... is... the best/worst thread ever!

Well, you never know when Tom's going to close this so....