Topic: Cable Comparison with The Mic Hybrid & Hydra mic cables

[stevetoney]

That's pretty much what this thread is all about.  I agree, there is not much real evidence around this forum pertaining to cable performance.  

By the way, Chris.  Please don't be offended in any way by any of my comments above.  I don't think they're offensive, but I certainly want you to know that there was no critical commentary intended in anything that I have written.

It just comes down to the simple fact that anybody wants to know ahead of time if their money is well spent and unfortunately on this board, there is not a concensus on cables so that makes it very difficult for a person that's upgrading their rig significantly (such as me at the present time) to know for sure...thus my request for data.

[Brian Skalinder]

While LR stereo comps aren't ideal in that they don't replicate the soundstage and environment of our field recording, they -are- controlled.  And since they're controlled, they will highlight the audible differences in the cables and the cables alone - if imperfectly relative to true field use - so that one may at least begin to identify the audible differences.  In the current case, and the case of a LR comp, more listening is due - no question.  But at least in the case of a LR comp we've introduced control to the initial comparison.

FWIW, there's an easy way to do a reasonably controlled comp:  find someone with a stock R-4, or with the same Busman or Oade mod on both pairs of channels, run a single pair of mics, split the mic cables, set levels properly, and...voila!  There's your comp.  This is not hard to do.  It is sometimes difficult arranging the appropriate gear and motivation from a taper willing to give it a go.

My R-4 is differently modded on both pairs of channels, unfortunately, else I'd offer to do it.  If anyone wants to loan me a stock R-4 (or Busman R-4 with the same mod across all channels), I'll not only do the cable comp, I'll also comp stock/Busman v. Oade Warm and Transparent mods.

[Church-Audio]

No offence Chris but you cant have a comparison if your not using the exact same song with the mics in the exact same position. A good test might be placing the mics in a room with a good stereo and playing the same track once with one set of cables then with out disturbing the position of the mics plug in the next set of cables and record the same track again. Then we really could hear the difference.

I agree with this comment whole-heartedly.  The control group needs to be truly controlled so that the only variable is the cables...and that would of course mean controlling all of the outside influences that could potentially color the sound that comes through a sample.  So, I agree totally with Chris.  

I don't understand why a high quality cable manufacturer wouldn't do this anyway as a sales pitch for their product if it is true because a) this is so simple to do and b) the high quality cable makers make such definitive claims that cables make such a large sound difference.  

So, if the cable people DO want the consuming public to believe that there is such a difference, then please give us some objective evidence to support these statements.  Then I will believe it because there's enough skeptics out here in taping-land that it makes me balk at spending the extra money.  

Give me a reason to actually WANT to spend several hundred dollars on cables and I will!  

Frankly, the fact that there is little or no control group evidence out there makes me wonder if it isn't all bullshit, but I don't necessarily want to believe that if it isn't true.

Thanks.

I think the test I mentioned is the only way to get a subjective evaluation. If I was to A-B a pair of speakers I would not do it with two different peaces of music! I would do it with the same music with the same level in the same position or the test is not valid. A valid test for a mic cable or an interconnect is a simple one to do.

Take a mic that is on a good stand place it in front of a speaker and substitute one cable for the other with out moving the mic at all. You can not do this test with two different mics you can only do it with one. Because your less likely to move one mic then you are two in the test. Then record something with fidelity like a nice stereo speaker and lets get the evaluation underway. that's how I would do it. I think if I was in the cable business I would want a few sample files of the same exact source with different cables.. TO prove that my cable is worth what I say it is.. And to show how much better my cable performs but I have yet to see such a simple test be executed and that's a shame because it could be the cable builders best friend to increase sales.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

FWIW, there's an easy way to do a reasonably controlled comp:  find someone with a stock R-4, or with the same Busman or Oade mod on both pairs of channels, run a single pair of mics, split the mic cables, set levels properly, and...voila!

I'm not sure I can agree.  You are changing the impedance of the system by connecting two loads to the mics.  The preamps also see a different impedance than normal..  I really don't know how much it matters and it may depend on the mics and pres.

I did a show last year where I used my splitters and had some weird bass issues. One possibility is that I only had 48v turned on from one source (either v3 or dav/bg1). I'm not sure if that was it or maybe it was the MGs (that was the only time I'd split the MGs) but the splitters have been left at home since... 


I was thinking about 744 based comps earlier today and it got me wondering if the 744's inputs are truly identical when running a pre in front of both.. Since one of them has a built in pre and the other does not, I'm not so sure.

[OFOTD]

FWIW, there's an easy way to do a reasonably controlled comp:  find someone with a stock R-4, or with the same Busman or Oade mod on both pairs of channels, run a single pair of mics, split the mic cables, set levels properly, and...voila!

I'm not sure I can agree.  You are changing the impedance of the system by connecting two loads to the mics.  The preamps also see a different impedance than normal..  I really don't know how much it matters and it may depend on the mics and pres.

I did a show last year where I used my splitters and had some weird bass issues. One possibility is that I only had 48v turned on from one source (either v3 or dav/bg1). I'm not sure if that was it or maybe it was the MGs (that was the only time I'd split the MGs) but the splitters have been left at home since... 


I was thinking about 744 based comps earlier today and it got me wondering if the 744's inputs are truly identical when running a pre in front of both.. Since one of them has a built in pre and the other does not, I'm not so sure.

Brian is on the right path though.  Using a stock R4 or one with the same mods on both channels you'd run two sets of the same mics.  While NOTHING can be exact this seems to be a pretty good way of doing it.

I am also NOT a fan of stereo tests.  I don't tape my stereo so i'm not going to base my dollars on a stereo recording. 

[Brian Skalinder]

I'm not sure I can agree.  You are changing the impedance of the system by connecting two loads to the mics.  The preamps also see a different impedance than normal..  I really don't know how much it matters and it may depend on the mics and pres.

Brian is on the right path though.  Using a stock R4 or one with the same mods on both channels you'd run two sets of the same mics.  While NOTHING can be exact this seems to be a pretty good way of doing it.

I am also NOT a fan of stereo tests.  I don't tape my stereo so i'm not going to base my dollars on a stereo recording.

At the very least, I think it's far more controlled than the current test.  Running two sets of mics v. the splitter's an even better idea, but in the past I've found it difficult to track down 2 pairs of mics.

I hear you on the stereo test, but the intent is not for the stereo test to stand as the be-all end-all, rather only as a starting point that at least illustrates - under very controlled conditions - that there is an audible difference and helps inform listeners of what those audible differences may be (granted they may change or reveal themselves or others differently under true field conditions).

[Church-Audio]

FWIW, there's an easy way to do a reasonably controlled comp:  find someone with a stock R-4, or with the same Busman or Oade mod on both pairs of channels, run a single pair of mics, split the mic cables, set levels properly, and...voila!

I'm not sure I can agree.  You are changing the impedance of the system by connecting two loads to the mics.  The preamps also see a different impedance than normal..  I really don't know how much it matters and it may depend on the mics and pres.

I did a show last year where I used my splitters and had some weird bass issues. One possibility is that I only had 48v turned on from one source (either v3 or dav/bg1). I'm not sure if that was it or maybe it was the MGs (that was the only time I'd split the MGs) but the splitters have been left at home since... 


I was thinking about 744 based comps earlier today and it got me wondering if the 744's inputs are truly identical when running a pre in front of both.. Since one of them has a built in pre and the other does not, I'm not so sure.

Brian is on the right path though.  Using a stock R4 or one with the same mods on both channels you'd run two sets of the same mics.  While NOTHING can be exact this seems to be a pretty good way of doing it.

I am also NOT a fan of stereo tests.  I don't tape my stereo so i'm not going to base my dollars on a stereo recording. 

Two mics = a waste of time for an evaluation how could you tell it was not the mics that were showing a difference in sound quality and not the cable. You need one MICROPHONE and change the cables. If you use two different microphones you have two different sounding channels... Because no two mics are exactly the same. But what do I know.. about doing objective tests...

[Shawn]

FWIW, there's an easy way to do a reasonably controlled comp:  find someone with a stock R-4, or with the same Busman or Oade mod on both pairs of channels, run a single pair of mics, split the mic cables, set levels properly, and...voila!

I'm not sure I can agree.  You are changing the impedance of the system by connecting two loads to the mics.  The preamps also see a different impedance than normal..  I really don't know how much it matters and it may depend on the mics and pres.

I did a show last year where I used my splitters and had some weird bass issues. One possibility is that I only had 48v turned on from one source (either v3 or dav/bg1). I'm not sure if that was it or maybe it was the MGs (that was the only time I'd split the MGs) but the splitters have been left at home since... 


I was thinking about 744 based comps earlier today and it got me wondering if the 744's inputs are truly identical when running a pre in front of both.. Since one of them has a built in pre and the other does not, I'm not so sure.

Brian is on the right path though.  Using a stock R4 or one with the same mods on both channels you'd run two sets of the same mics.  While NOTHING can be exact this seems to be a pretty good way of doing it.

I am also NOT a fan of stereo tests.  I don't tape my stereo so i'm not going to base my dollars on a stereo recording. 

Two mics = a waste of time for an evaluation how could you tell it was not the mics that were showing a difference in sound quality and not the cable. You need one MICROPHONE and change the cables. If you use two different microphones you have two different sounding channels... Because no two mics are exactly the same. But what do I know.. about doing objective tests...

chris I believe thay are speaking of using a stereo pair and a pair of splitters so they can use two sets of cables on the pair of mics at the same time.

editted so it makes sense

[OFOTD]

Two mics = a waste of time for an evaluation how could you tell it was not the mics that were showing a difference in sound quality and not the cable. You need one MICROPHONE and change the cables. If you use two different microphones you have two different sounding channels... Because no two mics are exactly the same. But what do I know.. about doing objective tests...

Well by that logic you'll never get a true test.   Either you compromise on running two sets of the same mics or you use one mic and use two different sets of music. 

Personally I am very comfortable in knowing that BOTH sets of my 480 are damn close sounding to one another.  I would trust them before I would trust one mic recording two different takes of music. 

These are not tests for a lab environment.  These tests and more specifically these results are for bars and clubs and sheds.  Let's not forget that.

[Church-Audio]

Two mics = a waste of time for an evaluation how could you tell it was not the mics that were showing a difference in sound quality and not the cable. You need one MICROPHONE and change the cables. If you use two different microphones you have two different sounding channels... Because no two mics are exactly the same. But what do I know.. about doing objective tests...

Well by that logic you'll never get a true test.   Either you compromise on running two sets of the same mics or you use one mic and use two different sets of music. 

Personally I am very comfortable in knowing that BOTH sets of my 480 are damn close sounding to one another.  I would trust them before I would trust one mic recording two different takes of music. 

These are not tests for a lab environment.  These tests and more specifically these results are for bars and clubs and sheds.  Let's not forget that.

Post edit I am not going to spend $250 on a mic cable with a test that uses, two different sources is not effective two different microphones is pointless. They dont sound the same how would you know what was making one cable sound better over the other? I know exactly where your taping. But if you want to spend $250 on some cables would you not want to know that they are worth $250?

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

Two mics = a waste of time for an evaluation how could you tell it was not the mics that were showing a difference in sound quality and not the cable. You need one MICROPHONE and change the cables. If you use two different microphones you have two different sounding channels... Because no two mics are exactly the same. But what do I know.. about doing objective tests...

Well by that logic you'll never get a true test.   Either you compromise on running two sets of the same mics or you use one mic and use two different sets of music. 

Personally I am very comfortable in knowing that BOTH sets of my 480 are damn close sounding to one another.  I would trust them before I would trust one mic recording two different takes of music. 

These are not tests for a lab environment.  These tests and more specifically these results are for bars and clubs and sheds.  Let's not forget that.

I am not going to spend $250 on a mic cable with a half assed test. Two different sources is crazy two different microphones is pointless they dont sound the same how would you know what was making one cable sound better over the other? I know exactly where your taping. But if you want to spend $250 on some cables would you not want to know that they are worth $250? Or would you rather spin the wheel or moronic test procedures and guess what one sounds better?

Since how "good" something sounds is generally subjective, I'm not sure your logic is appropriate.  In a scientific sense, you are correct.  But I doubt there is anything scientific about how we tape.

First, the contention that "stereo" testing is bad:  I feel that "stereo" testing is a good thing - you can control your environment and you (should) know how your system sounds while paying specific songs.  In several minutes, you can have 3 "samples" - cable X, cable Y, and how the stereo sounds naturally.  Comparing the 3 should give you an idea of which cable you prefer.

Second, the 2 mics are pointless:  Yes, but all (most) of us tape with 2 mics.  So I think it is "pointless" to test your 2 mics individually and at separate times.  I think they should be tested at the same time, since you will be using them in the field at the same time.  Since SoundStage is one of the features we listen for, how is testing in mono help determine that aspect of your cable(s).

Third, one man's trash is another man's cash.  Scientific test gives you empirical data.  Most of us are looking for subjective data.  I don't care that a $1000 cable is "scientifically" blah-blah-blah.  All I care about is how it sounds to me. 

My worthless Euros,

Terry

[OFOTD]

Scientific test gives you empirical data.  Most of us are looking for subjective data.  I don't care that a $1000 cable is "scientifically" blah-blah-blah.  All I care about is how it sounds to me. 

+T

[Brian Skalinder]

Scientific test gives you empirical data.  Most of us are looking for subjective data.  I don't care that a $1000 cable is "scientifically" blah-blah-blah.  All I care about is how it sounds to me.

How does one make a subjective comparison without the controls?  Without the controls, to what do you attribute the subjective differences?  At least with proper (or at least Good Enough, i.e. as good as we can get) controls we have reasonably well captured the data so we may make an informed decision about the comparison - subjectively or objectively, however one wishes.

I think we're going to - if not already - spin our wheels on this one shortly.  To summarize:

A truly controlled test is effectively impossible (or at least -extremely- unlikely) to do in the field (unless someone owns a venue in which we can create our controlled environment).  So, we must compromise no matter what:

• include control but compromise on environment:  stereo test, one pair of mics, test, swap cables, repeat.
• include environment but compromise on gear:  two pairs of mics (compromising on one element of control) or a single pair with splitters into an R-4 or some such (compromising on another element of control, but IMO a better one than two pairs of mics)

As best I can figure, those are our options.  Neither is perfect, but I think there's value in both.  I'm still willing to do the tests if people offer the gear.

[Church-Audio]

Scientific test gives you empirical data.  Most of us are looking for subjective data.  I don't care that a $1000 cable is "scientifically" blah-blah-blah.  All I care about is how it sounds to me.

How does one make a subjective comparison without the controls?  Without the controls, to what do you attribute the subjective differences?  At least with proper (or at least Good Enough, i.e. as good as we can get) controls we have reasonably well captured the data so we may make an informed decision about the comparison - subjectively or objectively, however one wishes.

I think we're going to - if not already - spin our wheels on this one shortly.  To summarize:

A truly controlled test is effectively impossible (or at least -extremely- unlikely) to do in the field (unless someone owns a venue in which we can create our controlled environment).  So, we must compromise no matter what:

• include control but compromise on environment:  stereo test, one pair of mics, test, swap cables, repeat.
• include environment but compromise on gear:  two pairs of mics (compromising on one element of control) or a single pair with splitters into an R-4 or some such (compromising on another element of control, but IMO a better one than two pairs of mics)

As best I can figure, those are our options.  Neither is perfect, but I think there's value in both.  I'm still willing to do the tests if people offer the gear.

A mono signal path eliminates all room for discrepancies with this type of test Hell I hate listening to a mono source but you have to admit its the best way to eliminate any variables you simply swap out the mic cable for another one and hit play again on the cd player and you have your simple yet effective test Two mics = twice the discrepencey... One mic one stand one speaker two mic cables = fair test with reliable results. I would test a cheap digiflex cable against anything that someone wants to throw and it. That should be the control and then we can all have a listen and see what the differences are. I bet there is none, but that's just me.

[cshepherd]

Doubts and variables aside, anybody else care to comment on the differences?  Theoretically speaking...if it were the cables...would this type of improvement to recordings be worth an extra $150?  Would the taping community be happy to have an attainable performance upgrade (read:  Not $2000 Orchids) from the mil-spec silver clad copper cables that is considered to be the standard amongst tapers? 

I appreciate everyone's input and I'll work on a mono recording when the cables return.  I think I can line some Mogami or Canare up locally.

Chris