Microphone cable differences

[Electrobumps]

There are definitely sonic differences between cables. A significant gain difference seems unusual though. Have you checked that the wiring is correct? Maybe you’d like to post some clips?

I thought this was a sensible place.

I don't agree there are sonic differences in cables. Although external sources could degrade the signal on a cheaper cable/connector. However that is external factors not the "sound" of a cable.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

There are definitely sonic differences between cables.

There may be differences when using exceptionally long cable runs, where capacitance would result in different HF attenuation.
There may also be differences between a poorly shielded cable and a good one, particularly in polluted RFI/EMI interference.
With the typical cable runs in studios (15-20m); I have never noticed nor measured a difference.

 

[beatsnblunts]

cut 1/4 connector off and re solder an xlr amd repeat your test. and better yet have a friend wife someone switch the leads around so you dont know which is which. then you’ll have a blind apples to apples comparison. i used pain over using the best cabling. and i still do for master buss and monitors but for mic cables im just grabbing whatever is hanging on the wall .

 

[Newmarket]

Totally get it what you mean as I was skeptical too... So i have asked a techy to wire me a van der hul cable because I got hold of it for cheap and "just to try why not" kinda thing. So he did it...

The test is so simple man... Neve m88 2 mic;s and 2 cables me talking. CH1 warm audio cable CH2 van der hul cable... switching the mic's.

Warm audio cable 12 o clock position, and van der hul cable at 3 o clock position getting the same gain on the Ev ND457 mic

On the sm57 is pretty much the same but noise on the van der hul cable is higher, with the warm audio cable is super silent.

That is why i am puzzled...

A 90 degree change in pot rotation does not imply a gain / volume difference of 25%. Look at linear / log / audio tapers together with perceived volume. Linear Vs Logarithmic and all that stuff.

 

[Newmarket]

cut 1/4 connector off and re solder an xlr amd repeat your test. and better yet have a friend wife someone switch the leads around so you dont know which is which. then you’ll have a blind apples to apples comparison. i used pain over using the best cabling. and i still do for master buss and monitors but for mic cables im just grabbing whatever is hanging on the wall .

"pain" ? Typo/predictive ?

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I suspect it is more than just a LPF effect.

What else?

The difference for a typical mic cable in regular vs star quad can be a 2 MHz vs 1 MHz 3dB point. Yet there is an audible difference.

In a very RFI/EMI polluted environment, yes, it's possible
But the cause is not the cable, it's the preamp that rectifies garbage.

 

[Dylan W]

I thought this was a sensible place.

I don't agree there are sonic differences in cables. Although external sources could degrade the signal on a cheaper cable/connector. However that is external factors not the "sound" of a cable.

There may be differences when using exceptionally long cable runs, where capacitance would result in different HF attenuation.
There may also be differences between a poorly shielded cable and a good one, particularly in polluted RFI/EMI interference.
With the typical cable runs in studios (15-20m); I have never noticed nor measured a difference.

There are definitely differences. I haven’t blind A/B tested in terms of mic cable, but have done so for line level (loopback tests, monitor chain). Short runs, so in theory not something where capacitance would be the difference maker.

The test I did was between Canare and Ghost Cable.

The differences I heard were not as stark as putting a transformer in the signal path, but definitely noticeable. Maybe analogous to improving PSU decoupling, or a bit more subtle. Slightly more detail, spatial resolution, transient definition, etc.

Cable won’t stop you from making great music, at the same time it’s nice to have quality in your monitoring chain.

 

[Khron]

Slightly more detail, spatial resolution, transient definition, etc.

Sighted or blind tests?

 

[gyraf]

..back in the 90'es when claimed cable benefits were just spawning, we did a series of blind tests in our studios to be able to select the right choice for a planned complete re-wireing. We tried among others canare, mogami and belden - plus some really cheap types. Test was simply a 100m piece rolled out, then either a balanced line signal or a pair of 4011's+piano

We found no difference. Despite all of us actually expecting there to be at least some difference - feeling we should see something relatively clear like when we swap long guitar cables.

We ended up choosing only on the basis of workabilty and mechanical feel - ease of stripping and soldering, bend diameter. (mogami was it)

I see this as an example of how easily we deceive ourselves, even when we try not to

/Jakob E.

Edit: What worries me slightly is the recent development where claiming cable superiority is somehow becoming a free-for-all, that you are somehow entitled to such claims without anyone "interfering with your world-view" by asking for some sort of real evidence, not only half-assed interpretations of microwave theory and such. To me, this smells slightly like trying to cash in on the social-constructivism trends that constantly tries to undermine the scientific basis in today's soceity.

 

[Dylan W]

Sighted or blind tests?

Blind. Just checked, I still have the files from the test I did. Looks like google drive took them down because I used commercial tracks, but if anyone is interested PM me and I’ll send them to you.

 

[Khron]

Blind. Just checked, I still have the files from the test I did. Looks like google drive took them down because I used commercial tracks, but if anyone is interested PM me and I’ll send them to you.

If you null them out in a DAW (time-align them perfectly and flip the polarity on one), the result you're left with should be only the differences, taking all subjectivity out of the equation.

 

[Matt Syson]

Of course LPF effects across cable will be different between reactive sources/loads and resistive and also depend on the source and load impedances, Thus cables from a mixer or controller to your monitor amplifiers will be less impacted than say mic to mic amp. The caveat being that the concept of 'passive monitor level boxes' is simply wrong unless the pot itself has a buffer amplifier VERY close to the actual pot (around & foot (30cm)). Signals from any gear will already be band limited to a great extent whereasa mic into a mic preamp has greater possibilities for response variations if you are looking at particularly HF transients which largely limits the sound sources even except cymbals or similar. Workability and feel plus not being shy of being soldered are the best warys to chose cables unless you know you have to contend with electrically harsh environments when star quqd cqn help IF it is teamed up with well balanced source and input stage 5many balanced inpouts and outputs are woefully UNbalanced especially out of the 50Hz to 5KHz bandwidth. YES I used to have to 'tune' the input balance on some gear in the past, just to get up to the specifications, so tightly twisted and as short as possible is important.

 

[RuudNL]

The only person who laughs out loud when reading about 'cable comparisons' is the manufacturer of very expensive cables!
A friend of mine (a HiFi 'phreak') says: "you can really hear it!".
I say: "you can't! What you think you are hearing, is the money that is no longer in your wallet!"

 

[abbey road d enfer]

There are definitely differences. I haven’t blind A/B tested in terms of mic cable, but have done so for line level (loopback tests, monitor chain). Short runs, so in theory not something where capacitance would be the difference maker.

The test I did was between Canare and Ghost Cable.

What was the methodology of your tests?

 

[k brown]

This has probably been posted before:

 

[rh001]

I have noticed small yet significant differences in mic cables over the years...it was always the no-name probably made=in-china cables that sounded a bit restricted....mogami, canare or belden brilliance sounded similarly good. I also remember once a 50 year old Belden 8412(?) cable had that restircted sound...due to aging, or due to type of insulation materials..I think insulation around conductors was rubber. I noticed the above during various system tests/troubleshooting. I think if I had the money and the need I'd do a super test but that would require a band and about 4 hours.....different mics, different cables on the mics, careful notes and then recording individual instruments as well as making a mix. A really good test is impractical. Simple testing against a good brand name cable can weed out the chud.

 

[JohnRoberts]

..back in the 90'es when claimed cable benefits were just spawning, we did a series of blind tests in our studios to be able to select the right choice for a planned complete re-wireing. We tried among others canare, mogami and belden - plus some really cheap types. Test was simply a 100m piece rolled out, then either a balanced line signal or a pair of 4011's+piano

We found no difference. Despite all of us actually expecting there to be at least some difference - feeling we should see something relatively clear like when we swap long guitar cables.

We ended up choosing only on the basis of workabilty and mechanical feel - ease of stripping and soldering, bend diameter. (mogami was it)

I see this as an example of how easily we deceive ourselves, even when we try not to

/Jakob E.

Edit: What worries me slightly is the recent development where claiming cable superiority is somehow becoming a free-for-all, that you are somehow entitled to such claims without anyone "interfering with your world-view" by asking for some sort of real evidence, not only half-assed interpretations of microwave theory and such. To me, this smells slightly like trying to cash in on the social-constructivism trends that constantly tries to undermine the scientific basis in today's soceity.

I wrote about funny wire back in my 1980s magazine column "Audio Mythology". Loudspeaker wire had more aggressive merchandising than mic cables but again there were only very small measurable objective differences.

Subjectively many customers were separated from their excess cash.

[edit- The dominant mechanism for loudspeaker wire is resistance. The dominant mechanism for microphone cable is wrap/shielding. The dominant mechanism for guitar cables is capacitance. /edit]

[edit2- Cable capacitance also had a small impact on MM phono playback cartridges as that cable capacitance adds to the nominal 47k and 150 pf preamp input termination. Its easy to imagine unusually long or short phono cables affecting the top octave response. /edit2]

JR

 

[Newmarket]

[edit- The dominant mechanism for loudspeaker wire is resistance. The dominant mechanism for microphone cable is wrap/shielding. The dominant mechanism for guitar cables is capacitance. /edit]

JR

All that. Add in the use of a semiconducting layer for guitar / instrument cables to attenuate noises caused by cable movement with high Z sources eg a typical bass / guitar passive magnetic pickup. And active pickup instruments can still have a relatively high source impedance if there are passive pots after the preamp section.
Also there's no subjectively "perfect" value for guitar cable capacitance. Some tone buffs rely on the cable capacitance for it's part in the tone. To the extent of deliberately using longer than required cables. Or an old style skinny curly cable.
E Guitar and Bass world often doesn't want / appreciate high fidelity. Witness reactions to low impedance guitar pickups and JBL bass drivers.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

E Guitar and Bass world often doesn't want / appreciate high fidelity. Witness reactions to low impedance guitar pickups and JBL bass drivers.

Almost universally, people don't like treble in the tone of electric guitar.
I made experiments found that a sharp (4th-order) roll-off at about 4kHz was just the ticket.
Part of it is that electric guitar tone is an acquired taste, but I would think there a physiological reason to that in addition.

 

[Newmarket]

Almost universally, people don't like treble in the tone of electric guitar.
I made experiments found that a sharp (4th-order) roll-off at about 4kHz was just the ticket.
Part of it is that electric guitar tone is an acquired taste, but I would think there a physiological reason to that in addition.

Interesting. In my limited experience that's true. Higher frequencies giving a "Bee in a jamjar effect" Although if micing a typical amp you don't get much out of the speaker above that ? And you can usually safely hpf at 150/200 Hz in most cases to avoid "mud'.