I made these cable lifters. The cable is supported by a rubber band across the top, different tension rubber bands for different weight cables. The two component parts are not glued together.
Not sure that they make a great deal of difference as I upgraded my system from a 250 to a 300DR at the same time.
Cheers, Steve
Whatever inert that’s used, that gets them off the floor, as a part in the overall sum, helps some. It’s part of the exploration fun.
You are right of course Phil. The bottom photo was taken before I introduced the rubber band across the upright to give even more protection from floor vibrations.
Cheers, Steve
I am perplexed.
Presumably, the intention behind elevating a speaker cable is to prevent the cable from picking up physical vibrations from the floor. Is that right?
If so, presumably elevating it off a hard floor using a hard object such as plastic won’t decouple it any more than lying it directly on the floor. Instead of the weight of the cable being spread over its length, the same weight is instead concentrated at a point on the elevation contraption. I am not clear on how this can make any difference to the transmission of physical vibrations.
I think the reason why cable risers have an audible effect is a combination of things. Reducing, or at least changing, vibrations is likely one of them. Another reason I’ve read somewhere is that every conductor carries an EM field around it. This field is said to behave differently (maybe even hindered?) at the side of the cable that’s on a floor vs. the side that’s not. This one kind of made sense in my head at least.
How much energy is transmitted from the floor to an object above it is greatly dependent on the surface area in contact with the floor. Racks and speakers use spikes primarily for this reason. Obviously if you move the whole floor up and down or side to side, the rack moves with it. But in terms if transmitted energy travelling into the rack, small contact area greatly limits that. I would hope a cable lift mechanism based on reducing microphonics (though as has been discussed, that is not the purpose or theory behind all lift mechanisms). performs that in some way. reduced surface area is certainly the cheapest way to go about this.
Peter, I’m sure a nice glass of wine makes far more of a difference than a lot of these lunatic fringe tweaks that people get so excited about. There is a lot of money to be made by selling things that people think make a difference.
That explains why some bottles of wine are so expensive.
Yes, cable risers are indeed fringe.
According to Danny Ritchie (see video mentioned in OP) it’s likely that (if done effectively) it would make an audible difference in only about 10% of hifi systems.
So for most of us (even on this forum) it’s a waste of time.
To be totally effective one would need to calculate the exact positions of the risers, so that they all are taking the same weight.
Also to make sure there is symmetry of left and right speaker cable risers. Those with their systems out from between the speakers and at the side could have an issue with one speaker cable run needing more risers. This will negate symmetry, so won’t be very effective in portraying a coherent stereo presentation.
Thought experiment. Is it wrong purchasing equipment that you think improve the sound and are very happy with even if it technically or in a well made AB test proves you were wrong?
Indeed. It’s no different to wearing trousers that you think makes your backside look great.
My backside looks great without any trousers 
Hey - it’s neat back there.
Hats off to you Sir! 
If it cost a penny, it’s still wrong under these circumstances (proven to be wrong), but who cares. (Although it’s a bit problematic if this myth is then propagated)
If it costs a lot, one might be inclined to avoid a useless expense
I’d argue that a dedicated mains is fringe too but it doesn’t stop hh waving that particular flag
Thank you. Same for me.
Lovely discussion and we can differ in our views!
I understand the scepticism of some friends. Felt some before, these incredulous claims for fairly unthinkable swabs of hard-earned money. Bottomless pit of never-ending tweaking when what we need is just to be secure in our own thoughts and feelings and just remain calm, whatever storms are brewed up on the Forum… Why go through so much more, to tweak when we should just get back to listening and not be too bothered with microphony? Why the dedicated rack? Room acoustics? That spur? So many whys… Cable dressing is too much work. It’s rubbish…? Lifting the speaker cables off the floor is too much work too, therefore it’s BS. That cable lifter costs a damn arm and leg… hell no! Looks terrible too for the room’s aesthetics…
Whatever rocks your boat - WRYB.
Whether money be made on these “superfluous” anti-microphony tech is up to the open market and to the sonic end result achieved after money’s been spent, to decide its shelf-life. I didn’t think any of this would really matter, just wanted to plonk and play… but the truth is still the truth, fact remains fact, when tried and tested by many, friends. It just takes each of us time to realise it, or not realise - accept for that matter - and that’s fine.
I’m no engineer or acoustics guru. Maybe I’m anal when it comes to set up and prefer the cables lifted off the floor especially when heavy bass is thundering through… but the floor does vibrate, and I do what I can to try and keep everything in the chain as still from microphony as possible. Been looking at wood blocks, foam blocks, all sorts of contraptions from cheap to ludicrous… and it’s been illuminating and fun. Can’t say for sure what works or doesn’t. Gotta try. Not just surface area contact for me, I believe the type of material used (as sceptical as I am) and the design does make an audible difference collectively with all the other tweaks.
