|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In my quest for a new RGB video cable I became discouraged one night at my university recording studio which happens to also be a professional studio. My friend in the Sound Recording Technology program invited me over one evening to "help" mix down a project he is working on. I asked the director and senior engineer what video cables they used in the video system of the studio. He told me Canare and TecNec, saying that they were quality cables but nothing excessive. He really gave me a dose of reality when he said they used audio cables of the same companies. He says most "highend" cables are just high priced and over engineered producing no noticable difference, and that all his studio friends do not use "highend" cables. He said how can a cable make a difference if the internal cables of your equipment are of less quality that the cables connecting the components together because no company uses the Audio Quest $2200 cable inside their electronics so why have it outside the device. Digital cables are even worst, as long as a 1 or 0 gets there, the quality of the RCA does not matter. Had anyone else said this I would not take it to heart but this is a group of people that makes audio recordings for a living.
The sad but true signal path that happens everyday in studios across the globe. Guitar output>>crappy patch cable>>amp>>22 gauge speaker cable>>amp speaker>>mic>>standard mic cable>>mic snake>>console>>patch cable>>outboard gear>>patch cable>>console>>patch cable>>recorder and all the wiring inside the electronics. Not one part is as "good" as the typical $300 RCA interconnection most people use in their systems. I'm not sure if even the money spent on my basic straightwire cables was worth it. WHAT DO YOU THINK??
Follow Ups:
BTW, have you seen the following thread over at Inmate Central regarding a cable comparison that was done at a recording studio:
The reason you usually don't need exotic cables in the studio is that most of them are balanced and driving a low impedance. In such conditions, the cable plays a small role in the sound. The low impedance balanced line system was developed specifically to eliminate cable problems (and is what made transcontinental and transoceanic phone calls possible in the process).Audiophiles for the most part use the older technology, single ended cables, which have no termination standard and are usually terminated at high impedance. The result is that the cable has a BIG effect on the sound.
Engineers in the recording studio usually do not think of these differences when expounding on cables (if you remember the STEREOPHILE/AES exchanges on this subject back in the early-mid 90s) and audiophiles don't usually stop to think about these differences either.
Apples and Oranges.
There *is* and upside- its possible to bring low impedance balanced lines into the home. The result is that the cables can sound better then before. IMHO of course but it seems like *properly driven* balanced line cables always sound better then even really exotic single-ended cables. I emphasized the *properly driven* (meaning: by the source or the preamp) because if the source (or preamp) does not have the low impedance drive capability then much of the advantage is lost.
Studio gear of course is designed for the low impedances (the termination standard for line level is 600 ohms). BTW, guitar pickups are usualy fairly low impedance too. But they also are rarely more then 20 feet and are always part of the sound that the guitarist is striving for. So they can't be included in this discussion as the coloration is intentional one way or the other.
FWIW, the 600 ohm balanced termination thing is not used much anymore. It was more a standard when practically everything in the studio was transformer coupled back in the olden days.You'll see most capacitor mics come out with an output impedance of around 200 ohms or so, wanting to drive somewhere around 2Kohms in a mic preamp. All the rage right now is providing variable input impedance selection on the micpre to purposefully alter the loading and alter the sound.
Most transistor line level gear in studio racks these days will be electronically balanced. Some tube gear will offer transformer coupled outputs and others will be hybrid going into a 990 amplifier or such and most of this stuff will not be dying to see 600 ohms planted on their outputs. You'll see most line level input impedances sitting around 10Kohms or so. And there's still plenty of unbalanced +4 gear around that will do fine into 10K as well.
Common Instrument inputs for guitars on Direct boxes offer input impedances upwards of 100Kohms, 1Meg ohms and even 10Megohms. I don't consider this to be "fairly low".... Did you mean to say "very high?" Because yes, at these impedances, UNbalanced, the guitar cable has a very large impact on the sound, which can be chosen for specific effect.
A lot depends on the studio involved (we did not see any list of the actual gear used in the original post)! These days, a lot of semi-pro gear (like some of the Tascam stuff) has of course gotten away from even balanced lines. OTOH, other gear that might be considered more professional (ex. Otari MX70) still sports a low impedance input (although it is switchable for lesser drive systems).My Neumanns will drive 150 ohms if need be. It might tell you something about why some more modern recordings have gone downhill as opposed to 30-40 years ago (digital aside).
Nevertheless, gear aside, the 600 ohm standard works. It is very effective on reducing cable problems.
Guitar amps are a different story. As I mentioned before, the guitarist is trying for a particular sound, in which the cable is playing a role. So they really are beside the point.
Yes, the balanced low impedance drive does help reduce the effect a calble has on the sound, butit does not eliminate it, and the runs are typicaly much longer, with more cables involved in the total recording system.
Our enjoyment of the sonic fidelity of a recording is based largely on one aspect -the engineer. He/she is making the most dramatic decisions that will effect the sonics of the record -not the gear or the cables! I've experienced it both in mixing and recording. Bring in one engineer it sounds one way bring in another and you'd think you were in a different city. I once had an assitant mix a song for a project that had been primarily done by a name engineer. It was in the exact same world class room (Power Station) with the same gear. The final results were great except for one notable BAD mix -the assistant's attempt.Are better cables likely to make any kind of difference in a world class studio? -sure. As a matter of fact in the mid ninties one of the most ubiquitis mixing console companies was SSL. They were in most every studio (still are) but many engineers hated them because of their relatively poor fidelity (compared to say Neve). Then they released the G+ series which won over many engineers. It was for some the first marginally acceptable model by SSL. One of the touted changes? Oxygen Free Copper internal wiring! So there, the pro audio community does appreciate better wire :)
However, for the same investment it would take to run 1000' of Cardas Golden Cross all over the place a studio could put that money into things that would make much more noticable sonic improvements -better mics, preamps, outboard gear, improving room acoustics etc.
Another important point about any fidelity being lost in the long runs of cable is that a good engineer is ultimately compensating for this in a number of different places starting with the selection and positioning of the microphone. One inch (no exageration) difference in the position of a mic can make more difference than the brand of cable carrying the signal. The decision to put a Neuman U47 vs a Telefunken 251 in front of a singer can likewise make a great deal of difference in the texture and presentation of the singer's voice (edgy and abrasive, airy and romantic, etc). With audiphile systems we talk about the importance of synergy of the whole system so think about the massive effort the engineer is making to synergize hundreds of variables in BOTH the recording and the mix of a record.
Just my 2 cents.
See:
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/30013.htmlSince they originate the music source, they can use up almost all the signal abberation headroom there is, and as long as the playback system does not take the recording playback event over that edge, all is well.
However, it has been my contention that this very fact is why some systems respond so positively to replacement of cheap OEM/freebie audio cable, is that they are pushing the recorded playback event over the edge, past the audibility limits, and so, even very small aspects of improvements can become much more important.
As noted in the referenced post, not all recording studios use garden variety cables, many use premium cables of one sort or another, no, not $2200 AudioQuest cables, but as noted, they have a lot more signal abberation headroom to use up than most playback systems.
As for digital interconnects, the same kind of thing is still true to a large extent for the studio, they can experience more jitter related aspects than home playback, and not suffer the sonic consequences.
See:
http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/jitter.htmSure, some recoridng studio folks still don't have a clue, mainly because they ARE blessed with having ALL the distortion and audibility headroom to play with, so they never get much of a chance to notice cable upgrades or changes as readily. That doesn't mean that it is not a factor in home playback.
Many guitarists and musicians have begun to notice that really good cables can make a difference for them as well. Live sound that is basically well done otherwise can also benefit from the lack of prior signal abberations, and can "get by" with heavy-duty pro-sound reinforcement speakers, pro-sound amps, and cheesy cabling, and yet still sound very immediate and "real", despite what is actually a mediocre level of overall system performance.
Play a CD back through that same sound system, and it just doesn't sound as immediate or as good, yet the live sound event is pretty decent overall.
Keep telling yourself that Jon; Maybe you'll believe it one of these days.
I think most people in studios understand snake oil when they see it and hear it, and if you bother to refer to Eva Manley's post below it's not too hard to understand why.
I don't thinkt that the way things are in some studios, due to expediency, or cost reasons, has anything to do with what the actual situation is.If you are saying that recording studio owner's or recording engineers automatically know enough to properly evauluate whether or not audio cables make a difference, well, that is a huge stretch and would require some substatiation on your part.
I think that the studios who have not thought about or addressed their cables, either are in that situation beauces of ignorance, poor advice from some well meaning preamp engineer, or some other reason, not the least of which is the sheer costs of upgrading the large amount of cables in a studio.
Despite the sheer quantity of cables in a studio, many DO use premium Belden or other major brand name cables, rather than some generic Home Depot wiring. They just don't use a branded High End aftermarket cable such as AUdioQUest or Kimber.
Again, a lot of studios HAVE started using Monster, Kimber, etc. It is not just a mere handful, but plenty.
I see you just ignored Eva Manley's post below. Is that what happens when we cloud the issue with facts? You go on your usual rant into your own agenda?
I read her post once, when I first saw this thread, and then again, after your post.In point of fact, my reply was written with that in mind.
I am very much aware of how a recording studio operates, having been both a part-time assistant recording engineer, and a "producer" on an album (both some years back), and having had person to person experience with several different recording studio owner/operators over a period of many years.
The company I currently work for has an in-house recording studio, used as a demo room for one divisions products, and as an in-house facility for various audio related purposes. I designed the monitors used in that facility, and have access to that facility as well.
I also record live music as a hobby, although I don't get to do that as often as I like.
So I know more than a little bit about the recording end of things, as well as having a very real point of reference for what is possible, and what is typical, in a recording studio.
SOME recordings are made as Eve Anna relates, and without any regard for sonic integrity at all, only acheiving the end resulting "effect", as heard in the studio. That makes it neither the best way, nor the most nearly correct way, or even necessarily relevant to whether or not any studio's use high performance cables, whether of a major commercial brand name, or a major aftermarket high-end cable brand name.
Virtually ALL of the purist and all-out recording companies/brands, such as Telarc, etc. use premium or high-end cables to make their recordings. A lot of well renowned studios also use premium cables, does this make all of them dupes or idiots?
As for having an agenda, or ranting on, it would seem that you are doing more of that than I am.
I assume, then, that you never clean your windows at home, either.
After all, they present a "distorted" view of what's outside, so why bother to clean them?Obviously, some recordings are made more carefully than others, in all respects. And some have the life processed out of them. But, if you're into this hobby, the goal is to get the most you can out of the recording. If you don't care about that, there's always video games.
FOTR, I have no idea if some of the frightfully expensive wire out there comes anywhere near justifying its price.
But I do know that wires carrying a/c of frequencies varying by a factor of 1,000 (which is what audio signals are) have significantly different electrical characteristics that can affect system performance in observable ways.
And I do know, when I changed from relatively high inductance/low capacitance interconnects to low inductance/higher capacitance interconnects, there was an immediate and obvious change in the sound that was produced.
I have been to many studios including "audiophile" studios. Even Doug Sax would agree with you privately but publically he wouldn't dare step on the industry's "audiophile toes".Keep in mind that "audiophile" cables have only existed since 1979 or so. I guess everyone in the sixties/seventies with Quad speakers and tube electronics couldn't possibly get good sound? Don't think so. There is a reason why industry insiders call them the "Wire Bandits".
Dream on. A twisted pair of Radio Shack wirewrap wires with their plastic RCAs easily beat the Canares I had. Certainly there are very expensive cables out there that are impressive to look at but not to listen to. And certainly there are several people who have made a lot of money selling cables that are heavily marked up. But there are many cables that sound much better than the low resistance and capacitance and cheap cables used in most studios.
> > there are many cables that sound much better than the low resistance and capacitance < <Are you saying you prefer cables with HIGH resistance and capacitance???
When I was in college I met someone who runs a successful recording studio in the Boston area, and I noticed he was carrying TONS of Radio Shack interconnects. Shocked, I asked him what those were for... He said they were for his studio. I asked him why he did not use better cables, and he told me that the difference in sound quality was not worth the extra money it cost to purchase audiophile type cables. He is constantly switching cables from one piece of equipment to another and they break or get lost.While I like audiophile type cables, I can understand his perspective. He is, after all, running a business.
Can you prove that DBT is a valid indicator of long term enjoyment of a particular component? Are DBTs used in selecting & reviewing component? Why don't I see DBT of CD player, speakers, amps, etc., only of cables???
It only tells you if two components truly sound different. You can DBT anything but I think cables get picked on because, as far as I know, nobody has successfully distinguished two cables of similar lengths.If you perceive it to sound better when sighted and you enjoy it, a DBT doesn't tell you that you shouldn't.
-Mike...
DBT has some use in determining if certain tweaks are really audible or if components in similar classes really sound the same. It can save people a lot of money by not wasting it on components that have little effect on the sound. I'd rather spend my money on good CD's. You don't see a lot of amp/CD player etc, DBT tests because they were proven long ago to (mostly) sound the same. There are still a few lemons and badly designed amps/CD players but they usually can be weeded out by their crummy measurement results. One limiting thing about DBT , it can let you tell if there's a difference between two components, but what if both components sound crappy?Even the noted subjectivist Arthur Salvatore seems to believe in DBT. He discusses ABX and the Wireworld Comparator on his website high-endaudio.com. He seems to feel that cables have a relatively subtle effect relative to other components.Also check out a great article by Len Schneider titled "A Wee Touch of Science" at the link below:
As you can tell if you ever evaluated polarity, studios make no particular effort to even achieve the same polarity on all their mics. Similarly if a cable works, it is good enough. When you are mixing for radio broadcasts and cheap speakers you are not interested in phase, polarity, or any measure of sound quality. All you want to do is boost the bass and probably the treble.
I know that experienced RECORDING ENGINEERS definitely make an effort to evaluate phase, polarity, and sound quality in commercial recordings. That is not to say everyone is a knowledgeable or experience recording engineer. That is also not to say that the commerical recording process is the same as the "audiophile" recording process. That is also not to say that I haven't personally witnessed piano mics out of phase on audiophile live to 2 track recordings either.The commercial recorded multi-track process is a constructed craft in its own right. It is not trying to be a live to 2 track audiophile event. There is place and purpose on this earth for both types of recordings. But to imply that "they don't care" or "they don't know these great audiophile secrets we hold" is quite naive.
Cheers, EveAnna Manley, Manley Labs
I never said they should pay attention to us, but there have been some instances where studios have made a great effort with the resulting excellent sound. I just think most are indifferent.
I'm not trying to be argumentative with you, Norm. 85% of my business is building high end recording equipment. It is a big market too. The other part of my biz is building high end tube gear. We straddle both camps.These recording guys are not indifferent, I promise you. Not all Recording Engineers are a George Massenburg or a Bruce Swedien. Not all Mastering Engineers are a Bob Ludwig or a Doug Sax. "Most" are not indifferent, though. Really.
Cheers, EveAnna Manley, Manley Labs
I recently bought an ART D/IO DAC, and so need Interconnects with 'phone plugs. The sales guy at the store (which caters to musicians, not audiophiles) gave me some Mogami-based patch cords at $10.00 each. He said have the recording in the world is done with Mogami-based wire. Quite rightly, he said this would be better than a phone-RCA converter plug.These replaced by Wireworld Atlantis cables. The sound is wonderful. Ok, there are lots of confounding variables -- Atlantis isn't really high end (but still way more expensive), and I was changing the DAC at the same time as the cables. There was bound to be a big difference. However, there is nothing in the current set up that would motivate me to improve these interconnects. It would be tempting to see if I could get some of the same wire with RCA terminations, and compare it with the Atlantis
Have you ever gone out and purchased typical cables used in a studio?? By that I mean XLR balanced/unbalanced 1/4 plugs and the typical lenghts used?? Even for generic good quality cables it gets expensive fast. They have hundreds of cables between batch bays spares and the interconnects. To change to an audiophile type cable even in bulk would be extremely expensive plus the interconnects if they are not included. So there would have to be quite an improvement in overall sound to justify the expense. Obviously most professionals just don't consider the arguably audible diferences worth the expense.
Since they have the ability to "equalize", it's a moot point to them. Replace your speaker cables with zip cord for a week, then switch back. If you don't hear a difference, you wasted your money. But I would bet money that you will miss your highend cables on your first listen.Your system has it's own, unique sonic characteristics. Cables and ic's are a "tweak" to get the sonic sound AND "feel" that you are looking for. Recording engineers are too busy listening to the recording, not the playback.
Your right - recording engineers are listening to the recording. That's their job - as long as the recording is near perfect, then the CD or record will be too. They listen to the recording AFTER it has come through miles of cheap (but good) generic cable such as Canare or Belden. No studio would dream of using $500 per meter cable. It would put up the price of CDs by 50% and they wouldn't sound any better!
I've read quite a few cable discussions on AVSForum. One of the posters there was a big believer in cable differences. He decided to conduct some double-blind tests and he couldn't tell them apart. A few years later, he thought one cable sounded better and when he tried another DBT, he still couldn't tell them apart. However, when he knew which one he was listening to, he still perceived a difference.Technically, for runs under 50 feet, there is no reason why any cable of adequate guage will sound different from another.
I personally don't think that cables are audibly different except perhaps in cases where superior shielding is blocking RFI and the like.
Other than that, hearing is believing and you hear what you believe.
-Mike...
with IMPROVING the reproduction of music @ home. Obviously. We cannot influence the quality of the musical product BUT we can at least try to get as much of whatever musical info is still left in the cd/lp (badly mastered with rat-shack components, or otherwise).
That's also the reason why many upgrade components, isn't it?The production process is one thing, reproduction another. OK, I for one, would be happier if remasterers spent a LOT of extra time & effort (that wouldn't be paid extra, probably) using exotic machines to do their job.
Enough dreaming...
I think that you are way overthinking this issue. If you didn't have a way to judge for yourself, you could research the science, consult experts, and reach a conclusion. In this case, the answer to your overall question is very simple. Listen to different cables in your own system. If you hear a difference that is meaningful to you, great. If not, that's fine too.I'm amused at the various posters here at AA who continually insist that cables cannot make a difference based on one scientific theory or another. Then I go home, listen to my system with different cables and there are such obvious differences as to make any argument about cables not making a difference totally moot.
All the best
> > . He said how can a cable make a difference if the internal cables of your equipment are of less quality that the cables connecting the components together because no company uses the Audio Quest $2200 cable inside their electronics so why have it outside the device.Maybe I can make it easy to understand.
City water supply --> Pipes to your house --> Your Faucet --> Terrible taste (yuk, yuk, yuk)
City water supply --> Pipes to your house --> In-line filtration system --> Pipes inside your house --> Your Faucet --> Great taste or lack of it (Yummie, Yummie, Yummie)
You can look at the pipes, as being standard copper wire inside of speakers and your components. The In-line filtration system is your high priced cable, which might ward off EMI, RFI and other grunge.
Get the picture?
Have a great day,
Hi Brad, comparing wire to pipe is good but a filtration system
is another component in the water chain, not a pipe.
Maybe compare water pipe to expensive water pipe. :)
that's exactly it. nice clear way to explain it. the reason audiophiles need filtration systems is the recordings are 95% crappy sounding.
Most hard core audiophiles spend a lot of money and time finding the best recordings.
Nobody is forcing anyone to buy the high priced filters, so the ire with audiophile cable is quite misplaced.
What nonsense (pardon the rudeness). You may get dirty water from the reservoir, but you don't get dirty music on CD's (except maybe Enenem ones).No componant, cable or otherwise, can IMPROVE the sound. In fact every componant REDUCES quality. So the water analagy is misguided. Art J has it properly put. Water through gold pipes is the same as water through plastic ones. All you need to do is ensure you're not using lead ones, which will cause a nasty taste!
The originator of this thread has found out what people who have fallen to the sales pitch of "you need to spend $500 for good interconnects", refuse to accept. Your CD has been created at vast effort by engineers (who incidentally DO know about polarity, etc) using hugely expensive gear, but they know that good connecting cable costs $1 per meter- not $500! If this were not so, why do recordings (on CD or vinyll) sound so good, particularly when you consider that every microphone uses many meters of cable - not the 3 foot length joining your boxes? Some may think the $500 cable sounds better than a Canare one, but they're kidding themselves.
I bought some ATC speakers direct from the manufacturers a while back. They build monitor speakers for studios and have an impressive list of satisied customers from the music industry. Their demo room uses only 80p per meter Canare cable, and advise customers not to waste money on rip-off fancy cables.
So save yourself a fortune, use cheap (but good) cables, and take your girlfriend to a few live concerts. It's a much better way of spending the cash that's obviously burning a hole in your pocket!
Whatever - enjoy the music (PS: I didn't like the ATC speakers at home!)
Hi Peter,You evidently didn't understand the analogy, that other people have.
> > > What nonsense (pardon the rudeness). You may get dirty water from the reservoir, but you don't get dirty music on CD's (except maybe Enenem ones).
Dirty water, being EMI and RFI coming across from CD's going to either a preamp or directly to an amp.
> > > No componant, cable or otherwise, can IMPROVE the sound. In fact every componant REDUCES quality. So the water analagy is misguided. Art J has it properly put. Water through gold pipes is the same as water through plastic ones. All you need to do is ensure you're not using lead ones, which will cause a nasty taste!
What if a filter is being built into a cable. That filter being one that filters out EMI and RFI.
Every component doesn't reduce quality. Everything isn't black and white. I guarantee you can add another component in your system, which will improve your performance by a good magnitude. Insert the Tact RCS 2.2X into your chain. You'll be wanting to send me some champagne, after you hear the transformation.
Have a great day,
Hi BradDon't understand that studios, who use literally miles of inexpensive (but good) cables, don't have a problem of EMI and RFI being introduced, yet you say that, in the home, a 1 meter cable would cause this problem! Please clarify. As I understand it, Belden or Canare, etc cable is more than properly screened against these problems.
Yes, other componants (perticularly speakers) will greatly alter the sound. They all undertake some form of signal processing - cables (like water pipes) do not.
Tact equipment is not sold in UK, so I've not had the opportunity of using their "room correction system". I imagine it comes with a test CD and a microphone. You play the CD, the microphone and Tact analyses the sound reaching your listening position and suggests equaliser adjustments to compensate for non-linear frequency response.
Ideally this would be great. It sounds a bit like what "tone controls", or stand-alone "graphic equalisers" used to attempt. These lost favour as other componants improved and as people realised that the more componants in the signal path, the more the basic signal was spoilt. No doubt Tact has taken things a lot further - I presume the incomming signal is digitised before processing, and then un-digitised. Nevertheless, it adds trauma to the original signal and, if you can find a CD player, amp and speaker to suit your listening room, you would be better off without an equaliser. Tact seems to just make choice of equipment far less crucial. Or have I misinterpreted the purpose of it?
Good listening
> > > Don't understand that studios, who use literally miles of inexpensive (but good) cables, don't have a problem of EMI and RFI being introduced, yet you say that, in the home, a 1 meter cable would cause this problem! Please clarify. As I understand it, Belden or Canare, etc cable is more than properly screened against these problems.I never said they had to be expensive cables. I make up my own and use the Canare crimper, die and stripper, along with Canare connectors and cables. They do a very good job and far superior to the crap someone would buy at Rat Shack.
> > > Tact equipment is not sold in UK, so I've not had the opportunity of using their "room correction system". I imagine it comes with a test CD and a microphone. You play the CD, the microphone and Tact analyses the sound reaching your listening position and suggests equaliser adjustments to compensate for non-linear frequency response.
Join the Tact Forum on yahoo. There are several members from the UK that have the Tact equipment. They're very friendly and have invited people over to hear there systems. I've seen the posts. Actually, there is no test CD. You hook it up to your computer and hook a mic up to the Tact from your listening position. The Tact then sends out test tones and measures your room. You then apply up to 9 different curves you would like and the Tact makes the adjustments in the Frequency and Time domain.
> > > Ideally this would be great. It sounds a bit like what "tone controls", or stand-alone "graphic equalisers" used to attempt. These lost favour as other componants improved and as people realised that the more componants in the signal path, the more the basic signal was spoilt. No doubt Tact has taken things a lot further - I presume the incomming signal is digitised before processing, and then un-digitised. Nevertheless, it adds trauma to the original signal and, if you can find a CD player, amp and speaker to suit your listening room, you would be better off without an equaliser. Tact seems to just make choice of equipment far less crucial. Or have I misinterpreted the purpose of it?
The Tact is so much more than an equalizer. If you search on Tact under the Digital Section, you will see a plethora of info on it. I haven't heard of any megabuck system, where it didn't help things out, if the person using it, knew what they were doing.
Have a great day,
Brad
Thanks Brad - I'll certainly use Yahoo Tact site to talk with UK users. Since my post I've written to Tact - no reply yet, to ask for UK distributor. There's none shown on Tact site, but it does say they exhibited in London in September.I also asked why they power their 90% efficient equipment from mains. Form earlier AA posts, it seems that digital amps (the Bel Canto was the topic, I believe) are much better with overpriced mains cables. One asylum lunatic spent as much on his mains cable as he did on the amp! With that efficiency, and the certainty that mains is never good for powering HiFi, I asked why they don't use batteries. These would last days between recharges, particularly if efficient speakers are used. My own digital power amp ran for a week continuosly on a 12V 7Ah battery between charges.
Enjoy the music
I dont think so. Its more like reality check.
If the cables were a problem, they would deal with it.
Why should they when the other 99% are happy with the sound from their rack systems and third world briefcases! It is all about profitalility and I agree.For example, why should I spend £250 on a 1 metre power cable when it plugs into 15 metres of solid core twin and earth at £0.43p per metre? Do you think that housing contractors use gold connecters and 6 nines copper?
I know some German guys working in audio and recording business. According to them all this audiophile high-end stuff is BS. They are using generic cables all over the place, Belden, Cordial or similar.Think of high-price speaker cables. Do you think that the copper wire used in the drivers' voice coils is anything more than ordinary high quality copper wire ? You have maybe ten feet of super-duper speaker cable and then comes some hundreds of feet of that "lousy" copper wire.
The sound that is used to judge the recordings' quality during final mastering has been squeezed through miles of inferior generic cable. If the goal is to reproduce what the Mr.Mastering heard, why use different stuff.
a cable is a cable, an amp is an amp, a cd player.....blah, blah, blah.Listen to an Analogue Productions recording and check out what they use in the chain.
Better yet, listen to a high quality playback system with some good cables. You guys sound like a broken record.
Please don't jump to the conclusion that if someone thinks a cable is a cable, that they would also think an amp is an amp.That would be just as silly, if I said that you believe that a cable makes as much difference as a amp, speakers etc.
Cut-Throat
I have active studio monitors and I have asked the designer if they used some special cable for the internal wiring and he said no, just good quality copper of sufficient gauge. For him, high-end cables are plain non-sense.I have a studio preamp and I asked the designer if they used some special cables for internal wiring and he said, no, just good quality stuff.
There may be some professional who use non-generic cables and stuff but I bet, it's a minority.
An example of a manufacturer that uses name brand wiring inside his components is Jeff Rowland. I can't speak for the newer models, but my Model 1 has Cardas internal wiring.
The guy is partly right, but it is not a reason not to play with cables at home. If we accepted the idea that we should all use cheap equipment because all the guys at the studio use off the shelf equipment, our sound at home would be worse than it is now, which is again mostly due to overprocessed recordings.
The point with audiophile cables is to get the best out of a recording that has been done in a purist way, recorded with equipment that has been engineered in a purist way, and listened to with purist equipment. If, into a minimalist recording path using only the finest components, we were to introduce a baseline cable, the sound would not suffer greatly, but it would improve (or at elast change) if in that same path we used a specialized highly engineered audio cable, rather than an off the shelf one. Same with the home equipment. And if we could put only the finest wire inside our components, the sound would also improve. We don't usually find out because components manufacturers usually can't afford expensive wire inside the components due to cost constraints on retail production.
Besides, a lot of those guys at the studios can't hear nuances much any more anyway, they're too buys listening to overamplified, over processed music at too high volumes.
Above all, don'T become discouraged. Have fun!
T
Yeah for the most part, to generalize, most recording studios don't get into megabuck audiophile cables. But remember that in recording where they are CREATING a sound, EVERYTHING IS AN EQUALIZER from the microphone (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), its placement (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), the mic cable (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color or visual color!), the mic pre (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), the console (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), the dynamics units (chosen for a certain sonic color), and then the equalizers (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color which is then used to alter all the colors that just arrived there again). From there it (maybe) bounces off of analog tape (because we all like that color) before it goes through many channels of A to D, (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), to a DAW, where the computer can now strip all color out of the project. So they fiddle with the project in there applying processing, chops, edits, fades, punch-ins, pitch shifts cuz the singer can't really sing anyway, and god-knows-what. The better engineers will choose to bring out all the tracks via many channels of D to A Converters (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), via some digital cables (often chosen for a certain purple color), and then into a mixdown console (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), and then maybe again they need to re-equalize with another EQ (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), and then level it out with a compressor (chosen for a certain inherent sonic color), before it gets mixed down to (hopefully) 1/2" tape (because we all like that color) or maybe it got more color stripped out of it by the computer crunching the thing down to 2 channels and smacked over to DAT or some big computer file.So THEN, the Mastering House gets to put all the final polish on the tunes. Now Mr. Mastering Guy, he has the best gear yet, the audiphile wire, great acoustics, killer speakers, superb monitoring path, and all the best sounding EQ's, limiters, compressors, and other coloring crayons. So then he re-colors everything again, gets all the relative levels right, song order and spaces between songs dialled in, and then, because the Label and the Artist are dying to be louder on the radio than the Monster Truck commercial that will have had preceded their hit single, they all procede to smash the life out of this erstwhile artistry with a take-no-prisoners-limiter leaving the poor tune with a dynamic range of 2dB, so then, I wonder if anyone on this planet could pick out if the conga mic had a $4,000 40ft run of "audiophile" cable or if it was just something decent like Canare or Mogami that got the phantom power down to the mic without crackling and got the tunes back to the micpre without picking up hum.
Well that's how it goes these days...
I think you're rather over-egging the cake! The recording process is overy complex, particularly for pop music, but the quality of the conga mic is important and you would notice it if a Radio Shack crystal mic was used. The point is that the cable DOES NOT NEED to be over-engineered.I was at the Royal Albert Hall recently at a Prom Concert. The BBC transmit these concerts live every night for 3 months. In the Hall were well over 100 mics. Each had cables of over 100 ft to the main console in the Hall. This signal went to the OB van outside, was transmitted to BBC studios, where it was broadcast by FM an DAB. Literally MILES of cheap (but good) cable produced some of the finest music you are likely to hear in your home - and a fraction of a second after I was listening to it live! None of the multi-processing you describe!
You don't sell cables, you make fine amplifiers. I'm sure you will admit (and not be apologetic about it), that you use sensibly prices wiring inside the case. If you use anything like the cable used in daftly priced interconnects, or if you use Valhalla cable between your output transformers and binding posts, I'll eat my proverbial hat!
Hi Peter,
Well yes in our hifi products, as well as our pro studio products, for audio runs inside out gear we do use a certain audiophile wire that was chosen specifically for its low capacitance, a technical parameter that is important to us when we're working with high impedances. It's funny when we were looking for a good low capcitance two core cable, I knew the measurements for the Mogami cables because they publish them in their literature, and we had been using another audiophile cable too, but they had changed something in the construction causing the capacitance to go up. In some cases where we're fighting every picofarad, I wanted to see if any "audiophile" cable guys had some better stuff available. I polled about ten of my cable-maker buddies to ask them what the capacitance per foot of their smaller (suitable for internal wiring) two core wire was as most hifi cable companies don't publish much in the way of specifications. I couldn't get any hard pico-farads-per-foot answers from any of them, some didn't really know what I was talking about, and others were obviously just guessing and so I just asked for a few feet of each so we could measure this ourselves. So we picked a new winner, a two-core silver jobbie with a nice shield, listened to it, measured everything, and went with that, based on science, based on sound, based on ease of working with it, and lastly, based on cost.On a 1000ft reel, this cable comes at a fair wholesale price to us, twice what the lowest capacity copper Mogami balanced mic cable costs, and about half of the other certain audiophile cable we had been using for lo-capacity audio applications.
A 1M pair of IC's from this company retails for about $250. Whether or not you eat your hat depends on how daft you think that pricing is... it is definitely not as daft as it can get but yes, sometimes I wish we had such easy profit margins...
Cheers, EveAnna Manley, Manley Labs
Cheers, EveAnna Manley, Manley Labs
Hi EvaThanks for this. Two things come to mind. Firstly, you imply that mark-ups in the cable business are phenominal. Yes, they sure are! At $250 per meter pair, adjust for bulk trade price with no connectors, packaging, etc. and we're probably talking around the £5 per meter off the reel, an acceptable price for recording studios to pay and probably compatible with the suggestion at the start of this thread.
Secondly, most AA inmates would consider a $250 pair too cheap for serious consideration between their costly boxes, so I think your findings tend to reinforce the arguement that very costly cables are, shall we say, a misguided expenditure! My arguement is that it's far better to spend more on a good amp (Manley of course) with say $250 cables, than the same total on an inferior amp with $1000 cables.
If one shops around for good generic cable from Wardour Street suppliers (or US equivalent), it's likely people will find $250 per meter pair quality cable for about $30.
Maybe you'll whisper in my ear the cable you found. Meanwhile I'm munching my hat - it's actually quite tasty with ice cream and chocolate sauce!
Peter
PS Do you want a dealer in S England? Scotland really is a long way from London.
a
Thanks for reminding me of that perspective, to wit, EVERYTHING is an equalizer in the music creation process.......something we shouldn't lose sight of......
My very best sounding lps are older recordings with simple path. Maybe tube mics too, I duuno.
You have provided balm for my soul. You see,too often I criticize myself for being a hermit. This state of hermitage,in my imagination,was brought about by an inexplicable feeling that the pathways to wordly stature are strewn with thorns,and that almost no one gets through this path without becoming an asshole. And so I became an audio-purist,or at least as close to one that my wallet (which is less full than it should be due no doubt to the aforementioned world-dominating assholes) will allow. Yet still I punish myself with thoughts from time to time that this is all just paranoia. Nevertheless,I continue on with the obsession to further cleanse and purify my audio-system,like some neurotic that is forever washing the hands of germs. But at intervals someone like you blooms forth,bubble-like,towards me,through the misty wall,to assure me I am on the right path,after all. I am now more certain than ever that so long as I keep on pulling that trail of wires,I shall one day conquer the worm.
Is the situation any better for classical recordings? I know there are different techniques and philosophies for recording an orchestra but I was wondering if in general there is less processing and mashing when recording live classical music.
Thank you for some common sense here. More pro's in this industry need to "cloud the issue with facts" and help educate people.
It makes sense and the guy should be right, but in my experience the cables I use with my system makes a pretty profound difference, as do different CD players all pushing the same ones and zeros.You may or may not hear the difference that others hear because we all have different systems in different listening rooms.
In the end, you've got to trust your own ears.
Good Luck.
Enjoy the Music Live or Otherwise
Or is it the Placebo Effect (power of pursuasion)?Can you truthfully say that the megabuck cable provides significantly better performance (i.e., one that is worth the price) over the generic cable? Or is it just because you want to hear an improvement to justify your purchase?
Personally, I've never heard the kind of major, earthshattering differences that other audiophiles claim they hear from expensive cables and interconnects. And as a classically trained musician, I think I'm a pretty astute litener, albeit a sketical one.
Once adequate cabling is in place, I believe it is better to sink one's money into the equipment (and most importantly) the music.
C.B.,I guess I kind of agree. I do not think that any cable-change I have heard has produced an "earth-shattering" difference in the sound. The difference seems usually to be more like a "tweak" - maybe a change of a couple of degrees at most. Some of us cable reviewers should be more honest about this,but it never ceases to amaze me how if anything tweaks my system toward my liking that the joy of my obsession over-values the changeover by an order of magnitude. Economics does have a bit to do with it also. There,I've admitted it - the first step toward rehabilitation!? Of course,I think that satisfaction in the audio world has to do with both wise spending and also allowing oneself to become "acclimated" to the sound you have crafted without too much further ado. That is what I think. What I feel is the love of every successive tweak,and the urge to keep on tweakin' on!
Yes, many people enjoy themselves with "tweaking" - it makes them happy. It's like those guys who buy a Ford car, then spend all their spare time and cash polishing it, adding spotlights, go-faster stripes, fluffy dice, nodding dog, bumper stickers, etc. They think they have a better car. As long as the're happy ....! If only they spent the extra cash and bought a BMW in the first place!
If YOU can hear an improvement in YOUR system, then it is worth it regardless of what they use, IMHO.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: