speaker wire?

Yet again, some great info! And Anon is as perceptive as usual... you must sense what I stir-respond to. And this next bit continues in the same mocking vane... As for people that don't read the Product Description that clearly states "Oxygen free copper...", what can I say? [Other than I recall reading it - merely since I look for that as OFC is usually far more expensive, and at THAT price for that size! - but had troubles confirming it just now because I am so used to seeing "OFC" predominantly blazing title bars, headings and roll labeling.] But old timers clearly know the impact of Oxygen. It's like the old non-mono-crystalline copper that would cause signal reflections in the wire - and as any communications guru would know, reflections cause echos & distortions - hence leading to terrible sound quality. Not to mention the much greater resistance of the wire - but we all know OFC is lower resistance than normal copper - and it's much better spending more on Oxy-free cable than going up a gauge for reduced resistance. As for newbies that have successfully argued against the domains (mono-crystalline copper) by citing similar barriers in semiconductor components (as well their circuits obviously) and speaker cores, they fail to realise that speaker cores do not conduct electricity (other than the currents that are induced from the wire) besides which bigger/heavier magnets make up for that (never use rare-earth magnets - they are too strong and too small/light to be any good), and they fail to understand that the output to a speaker appears at the outputs of the final drive semi-conductors so any cross-domain conduction between silicon and conductors prior to that is simply irrelevant. The whole thing reminds me of modern car engines - people claim that alloy V8s or heads etc produce more power than older cast iron. This is obviously false - how can a lighter substance produce more power? Besides, it would obviously crack up under the strain. I suspect that people confuse alloy power with its lighter weight - the cars accelerate faster as a result. But if you totally ignore the dyno results for torque & (hence) power, I'm sure you will agree with me. Dyno test are just paper anyhow. (For noobs, that's an older version of "PDF" - just bits in a bucket.) Maybe it's like someone said in another forum that deals with mp3: "this CAPACITOR discussion always get out of hand... It's like discussing religion.... LOL...". Previously they said "Installing a capacitor or not is a personal choice... there is a lot of people here that don't believe in them... I have one with great results...". Yeah - I'm with him. He was replying to some goon that claimed a battery would be more effective (and cheaper). Ha! I'm just waiting to see his test results that show the capacitor has far better results than a battery mounted in the same position. That will really fix that anti-cap dork. Sorry - I got carried away. I love people that claim they are learning - or keen to - yet fail to discuss or follow up. Damn - I just broke out of my stir mood..... /ends. [Just reiterating - the stuff after para 2 & prior to the last paragraph is TIC (Tongue In Cheek, aka TFIC or TFUB (B=butt)).]