Topic: Best Interconnects?

[pyiteac]

This has been a good thread to follow.  I can see both sides of the argument, but I am a firm believer in the fact that you get your monies worth.  I am not a professional in this and have a very limited experience using a large variety or cables.  I am much happier with my recordings after I upgraded/changed(depending on your view) my cables.  I used to use starquad mic cables and Monster Cable RCA'S but, to my ears, my recordings sound better with the Zaolla's and Kimber's.  FYI:  I only spent $90 for both sets of cables so It didn't break the bank.  I just shopped around and figured it wouldn't hurt to use them.  Good investment so far.  Continue with your scientific data and rhetoric,  I am learning a lot about the science of signal transmission.  It's cool as hell.   

You said you heard a difference in your recordings when you switched cables, but how can you be sure it was the cables that were making the difference?  Was it the exact same rig otherwise?  Did you switch up cables at the show, or are you comparing 2 different shows?  Same venue?  Same band?  Did the engineer make ANY adjustments to the mix that might account for some of the tonal changes you hear on the recording?  Remember, mixing a band live is hardly a "set and forget" process, at least for any decent FOH engineer.

Too many potential variables to my mind, but again if you feel you're getting your money's worth then that's all that matters.

I hear a difference in my recordings.  The ONLY thing that changed is the interconnects.  The bass is deeper and smoother.  I get more detail in the low end and the highs are clearer.  Can I pinpoint where that comes from? Not really.  I really don't care where it comes from.  It sounds better to me. I know it's an unscientific argument, but guess what?  I'm the only one who really cares how my recordings come out anyway.  I started this thread to get opinions on good interconnects.  If you don't think they make a difference then why chime in?

Because you asked the question, and that's a valid position whether you like it or not (and obviously you don't).  Or are you just looking for someone to convince you that you did the right thing spending money on expensive cables?

You went from asking a seemingly innocuous question about a HIGHLY inflammatory topic and now that a few folks on this thread have taken the position that "cable is cable" and have asked you how you know it's the cables making the difference, you're getting defensive.  Obviously you wanted someone to tell you "brand X is the best" and everyone else to agree hands down. 

More than a few folks on this thread (some of whom actually make a LIVING in audio) have said it doesn't make a difference and that bothers you apparently, since you now "no longer care where your improvements come from" (according to your post above).

I really don't care what side of the argument any of the participants of this discussion is on.  I'm more happy with my new cables.  End of discussion for me.

Then why start this topic in the first place?  You're always going to get some responders agreeing with you that there's a difference, and some who will tell you it's irrelevant.  If you can't tolerate differing opinions and questions about how you measure the difference you hear, maybe you shouldn't ask questions in this forum.

I started the thread because I was happy with my change.  I wanted to see what others out there were happy with.  I had no idea it was such a hot topic on this forum.  Like I have said before,  I think they do make a difference.  If you don't then that's great.  I really don't care if you think they do or not.  It's your opinion and I have mine.  I wasn't trying to start any controversy.  I can tolerate others opinions and I really value them.  If you read one of my other posts I stated that I thought this thread was "Cool as Hell" because I have learned a lot from it. 

I didn't heavily invest in my cables and I don't think there is any snake oil at work here.  I too would have to see some serious evidence to prove the fact that a $200+ cable is better than a $40 one.    I have always valued your posts as you have a lot of knowledge.  I am a n00b here and enjoy as much input and feedback as y'all can give

[eric.B]

just love the cable debates!        

Everyone talks about hearing a difference between expensive and cheaper well made cables (which is true IMO.. as I hear a difference between silver/silver clad and copper), but honestly.. a "difference" doesnt always mean "better"..

[SparkE!]

It wouldn't make a difference unless the metal changed the reactance of cable, which as far as I know it does not.  SparkE hit on this earlier--the insulation and cable construction changes capacitance, not the metal itself.

Even so, we can take 30pF/ft as a reasonable figure for cable capacitance.  With a 100 ohm source impedance, that's a corner frequency of around 500kHz for a 100 ft cable.  So I sincerely doubt just about any reasonable cable people are using for a line-level connection is suffering from cable capacitance, even if you are using a cable that is 10pF/ft or 100pF/ft.

Yup.  And that's precisely my point.  As small an effect as bulk cabling capacitance and series inductance has on things, it's still a larger effect than you get by changing the metals used in the construction of the cable.

Something to consider, though, the FET amp used in electret mics, when properly biased with a simple pullup resistor has about 1/2 the output impedance as the pullup resistor.  So the usual 4.7k resistor gives you a little over 2.3k output impedance.  Do the math with that value and you find that you get a 23 kHz corner frequency for a 100 foot cable with a 30 pF/ft bulk capacitance.  So, you're down nearly 3 dB at 20 kHz.  I think you can hear that pretty easily.  Try going to one of the really skinny, small profile cables, and your capacitance triples and your corner frequency is cut to a third of what it would be with fat cables.

If you use a line level signal, that source impedance is going to be a lot less than a mic's source impedance and so you'll hear less of a difference when testing with a line level source.  Whatever the case, the main differences you'll ever hear are still from the reactive part of the cable impedance, not the resistive part.

[Chilly Brioschi]

pyiteac, enjoy your cables! You owe no excuse for what you hear or how to enjoy it to anyone.
We love a good cable thread, and the debate will rage on for a long, long time.
Do not take it personally in any way.


Great thread!

OK, here's one:

Make a 3-foot pair of interconnects with radically different metallurgical properties from the set which you have...say a pair made from iron(!), aluminum, or galvanized fence wire.
Be sure the inner conductor is insulated from the shield, perhaps with spaghetti or heat shrink.
I suggest that you steal a short length of shield braid from a piece of coax, like RG-58/U or RG-59/U to complete the wire.(push it together like a Chinese fingercuff and slide your center conductor through it)
Or if you really want to make a point, wrap the same material around the inner for the entire wire run.

The hardest part is the electrical contact of the center conductor of the RCA jack.
Be sure that it is a very clean and mechanically solid connection, as solder will likely not work.
It will not age gracefully, so use it for a short time and discard it or prepare to redo the connections often.

Now give THAT a listen and see if it makes a change.

I put forth the idea that if you cannot hear a difference, why would an elliptical wire be better than round, or oxygen-free copper be better than oxygenful(?) copper, or even pure silver?


BTW, I'm sure that long interconnects/mic cables will bring in the noise, just like any other "antenna" would.
The length will also add impedance, mostly in the form of resistance and capacitance and cut your high end a wee bit, if what I am told is correct.

Here's something to ponder, if you're so inclined: