[TenTec] OT: coax versus parallel wire, insulated wire for aerial

[Marinus Loewensteijn]

Have not followed the Bazooka discussion in its entirety since I feel it goes a bit far OT. However one of the last postings raised a question in my mind due to the reference to the Late Cbik with whom I had some interesting and pleasurable email exchanges.
 
One item he mentioned that by using insulated wire alone one can get a large reduction - up to 6dB - reduction in static. Perhaps this is one aspect that plays a role.
 
I am using PA0FRI's S-match and like it very much. It gives me extra input filtering and galvanic speration of the antenna and in my location / environment it has really cut down in static and interference. Recetly I have decided to replace all my PL259 - SO239 connectors with N connections. In this process I was also looking at coax and in this process I came across the (far) more expensive professional types of coax like LMR 400, LMR 195, RG 142, RG 223 etc.
 
Some of the marketing blurb was that these types of coax have less problems with locally generated interference. Somewhere else one ham stated that he preferred to have a remote ATU and have the antenna at least 20 meters away from the home because of all the interference he got from all the modern day electronic equipment in the home with its switched mode power supplies.
 
What I like to find out is have any of you experimented with the same antenna and feed it with parrallel wire and having the ATU in the shack versus having a remote ATU and feeding the ATU with high quality (double shielded) coax and how the perception was of which solution has the lesser amount of interference?
 
Many thanks in advance, Marinus, ZL2ML.
_________________________________________________________________
Buy, rent, invest property online today.
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eallrealestate%2Eco%2Enz%2Freview%2Fhome%2Dbuying%2Dinfo%2Ehtml%3Frsf%3Dmsnnz%5Ftextlink&_t=26000&_r=REA_NZ_tagline&_m=EXT