Liquid Conductors in your Interconnect Cables

[jabbr]

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

In addition to the well-known effect of gallium on aluminium, it is also corrosive to almost all other metals, including copper and steel. You really don't want that stuff loose in your house.

Shhhhhh ! The is Darwinian evolution at work here ... besides I like Gallium in my transistors & it's safe as long as you don't snack on them  

[jabbr]

Ahhh forget Gallium, with a cable made out of this: http://wccftech.com/ibm-gf-5nm/ you could do all sorts of convolutions and room processing, even better than MQA and all in a cable

[jabbr]

This thread needs a fork...

[jabbr]

15 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

FYI, I'm listening to them now....and they actually sound very good, whatever they're made out of.

 

They should ... these pups http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/promopages/gallium-nitride/ are a very interesting part for Class A power FET with low capacitance, and triode like linearity in the necessary voltage range

[jabbr]

It's gallium, and gallium does have indications in audio

 

... doesn't that make more sense than the byline for the cables?

[jabbr]

I thought maybe for that kind of $$$ the cables would have an amplifier built in... just a thought

[jabbr]

Sounds like an acid trip ... what kind of liquid in those?

[jabbr]

12 minutes ago, bumperdoo said:

 

Really?

 

Physics Explained

Hey we know that liquids are different than solids. How is this tied to the conduction of audio signals? That physics.

[jabbr]

On 6/5/2017 at 4:27 PM, Ralf11 said:

 

I thought this would be fun for those tired of stopping jitter with regeneration or origami blur discussions.

 

"With a solid conductor, or rather, an alloy or element in a solidus (below melting point) atomic lattice configuration. In such condition, ‘electrical response’ , or electron flow, is restricted to electron orbital ‘co-joined’ pathways in the atomic lattice. This is the situation in what we call ‘DC Flow’ in the given conductor. This relates to named observations like Johnson–Nyquist noise. "

 

Quoted by the OP. This issue is not with how the cables sound rather the pseudo-scientific BS that is being used as marketing copy on the website.

 

Surely if all that is important is the sound then what would be the relevance of scientismic jargon? 

[jabbr]

14 hours ago, bumperdoo said:

 

Why don't you give them a listen since this is an "Audiophile" forum my friend. *Audio* typically means listening...

Because I am busy and limit my time to projects that have a reasonable chance, in my own opinion, of being successful. Marketing nonsense pushes me away. Perhaps if a pair of cables landed on my door I would listen but frankly I don't publish reviews of the many many components I've listened to that I don't care for or don't perform as advertised-- likewise if I were tasked with designing a bridge, I wouldn't do by trial and error -- not to say that that strategy might not work in some situations.

 

Note that this thread seems to be about the marketing claims as opposed to the SQ of these cables according to the OP. Criticisms of such are thus on topic.