Proof that cables Do make a difference
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Looks like their server is down. Here is the text:
Kevin Becka June 15th, 2010
I recently wrote about a surround recording I did in a Cathedral. Apart from capturing a great performance using great gear like the DPA 5100 surround mic, Millennia HV-3R preamps and the JoeCo Black Box Recorder, my ulterior motive was to write a product review of the latter. Part of this process was to put the JoeCo on the bench and use our APx500 test system to verify the unit’s performance. During testing, audio tech Jeff Harris discovered that my number 2 channel was out of polarity. Some superior sleuthing by Jeff revealed that the source was the “Monster StudioLink 500 Precision Bandwidth Balanced 8 Channel Audio Snake with TWO patented multi-gauge Time Corrected Wire Networks.” Jeff, pulled apart the sealed XLR connector and sure enough, Pin 3 was “hot” on channel two.
Oddly enough, when I mixed the material, it sounded great albeit a bit weak in the center which I thought was due to the spacing of the players and my mic placement. I compensated for the weak center with panning and levels and it sounded fine. After discovering the polarity flip, I went back and compensated with a “backatcha” polarity swap on the center channel of my mix and WOOOSH! the center image bloomed beautifully.
DOH!! Not only am I mad at myself for not hearing this and taking my tracks for granted, I’m upset that I didn’t check polarity across the board. On the other hand, I know that accidents happen but COME ON MONSTER! $250 for a snake that does ONE thing and there’s no polarity check as part of the manufacturing process?
breath…….Xanax………breathe……. OK
Lessons learned?
1. NEVER trust any cable, no matter how expensive
2. ALWAYS check polarity during tracking and mixing
Kevin Becka June 15th, 2010
I recently wrote about a surround recording I did in a Cathedral. Apart from capturing a great performance using great gear like the DPA 5100 surround mic, Millennia HV-3R preamps and the JoeCo Black Box Recorder, my ulterior motive was to write a product review of the latter. Part of this process was to put the JoeCo on the bench and use our APx500 test system to verify the unit’s performance. During testing, audio tech Jeff Harris discovered that my number 2 channel was out of polarity. Some superior sleuthing by Jeff revealed that the source was the “Monster StudioLink 500 Precision Bandwidth Balanced 8 Channel Audio Snake with TWO patented multi-gauge Time Corrected Wire Networks.” Jeff, pulled apart the sealed XLR connector and sure enough, Pin 3 was “hot” on channel two.
Oddly enough, when I mixed the material, it sounded great albeit a bit weak in the center which I thought was due to the spacing of the players and my mic placement. I compensated for the weak center with panning and levels and it sounded fine. After discovering the polarity flip, I went back and compensated with a “backatcha” polarity swap on the center channel of my mix and WOOOSH! the center image bloomed beautifully.
DOH!! Not only am I mad at myself for not hearing this and taking my tracks for granted, I’m upset that I didn’t check polarity across the board. On the other hand, I know that accidents happen but COME ON MONSTER! $250 for a snake that does ONE thing and there’s no polarity check as part of the manufacturing process?
breath…….Xanax………breathe……. OK
Lessons learned?
1. NEVER trust any cable, no matter how expensive
2. ALWAYS check polarity during tracking and mixing
XLR miswiring...
BTW sometimes even high-end gear (amplifiers, for example) have their XLRs wired up backwards... Took me a while to figure it out. The RCA single ended connectors worked perfectly, the XLRs, nada. Nothing like grounding the hot to reduce signal levels.
BTW sometimes even high-end gear (amplifiers, for example) have their XLRs wired up backwards... Took me a while to figure it out. The RCA single ended connectors worked perfectly, the XLRs, nada. Nothing like grounding the hot to reduce signal levels.
All cables sound alike?
Yeah, generally "cables sound alike" means that someone's hearing is deteriorating, that or the gear is not well-integrated or compatible. The thing is, decent cables make a big improvement, as far as I can tell, even at the $200/channel powered monitor level (e.g., KRK Rokit 8s). So if they improve entry-level gear quite obviously, one would expect even more of a difference with high-end gear.
Of course the "they sound alike if they're constructed properly" is a foray into the ozone... there are plenty of expensive cables that sound mediocre to my ears, and designers generally have a "house sound". The power cords, interconnect, everything, has similar voicing.
Yeah, generally "cables sound alike" means that someone's hearing is deteriorating, that or the gear is not well-integrated or compatible. The thing is, decent cables make a big improvement, as far as I can tell, even at the $200/channel powered monitor level (e.g., KRK Rokit 8s). So if they improve entry-level gear quite obviously, one would expect even more of a difference with high-end gear.
Of course the "they sound alike if they're constructed properly" is a foray into the ozone... there are plenty of expensive cables that sound mediocre to my ears, and designers generally have a "house sound". The power cords, interconnect, everything, has similar voicing.
Nicholas-I must confess that I can't read your name without getting a smile. I think the only thing that is missing is Nicholas Bedworth III or something similar. Your name sounds so aristocratic, you just need a desgination after your name to finish it off.
Smile!
Well, a smile is certainly better than derisive laughter
Actually we're of ordinary middle-class English and Welsh stock, some German from the Schwarzwald, and the possibly eponymous Bedworth being a small town outside Coventry.
The family is English and Welsh (my father's name is Griffith Shackleton Bedworth, after the explorer to whom we are distantly related http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Shackleton of the late Victorian era). To say that my father bears a strong physical resemblance to Shackleton is an understatement. My great-grandfather emigrated around 1870, and was an early oil entrepreneur, back when oil wells were being drilled in Pennsylvania!
Mother's side of the family, also English and Welsh, arrived around 1630 and came to Connecticut from Cambridge, Massachusetts, with Thomas Hooker in 1636. And Silas Bronson is also an ancestor and became a well-known name in New York and the city of Waterbury, CT, to whom he bequeathed $200,000 (only a portion of his fortune) to be used for a new public library (and around 30 relations, including somethlng like 25 nieces and nephews got $15000 each, basically making them millionaires at the time, which was 1868).
So, I think this makes me an Ur-WASP, from Mother's background, you know, the people who were here inhabited New England and New York long before the Indians arrived; however, Ur-WASPs don't have titles, AFAIK. Hey, you! will work for me
Well, a smile is certainly better than derisive laughter
Actually we're of ordinary middle-class English and Welsh stock, some German from the Schwarzwald, and the possibly eponymous Bedworth being a small town outside Coventry.
The family is English and Welsh (my father's name is Griffith Shackleton Bedworth, after the explorer to whom we are distantly related http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Shackleton of the late Victorian era). To say that my father bears a strong physical resemblance to Shackleton is an understatement. My great-grandfather emigrated around 1870, and was an early oil entrepreneur, back when oil wells were being drilled in Pennsylvania!
Mother's side of the family, also English and Welsh, arrived around 1630 and came to Connecticut from Cambridge, Massachusetts, with Thomas Hooker in 1636. And Silas Bronson is also an ancestor and became a well-known name in New York and the city of Waterbury, CT, to whom he bequeathed $200,000 (only a portion of his fortune) to be used for a new public library (and around 30 relations, including somethlng like 25 nieces and nephews got $15000 each, basically making them millionaires at the time, which was 1868).
So, I think this makes me an Ur-WASP, from Mother's background, you know, the people who were here inhabited New England and New York long before the Indians arrived; however, Ur-WASPs don't have titles, AFAIK. Hey, you! will work for me
I'll bite, and agree with JD on this one. At best, expensive cables are a poor value vs. say, room treatment. At worst, tone controls. Me, I want a cable that does nothing (flat/neutral) as there are already enough variables in any system.
This supports John Dunlavy's contention that all "competently built" cables sound alike
Actually, you could apply that quote to much more than cables. Of course then you'd need to carefully define "competently built."
P
Actually, you could apply that quote to much more than cables. Of course then you'd need to carefully define "competently built."
P
And you're an expert so you can enlighten us more.
Lee:
I agree and disagree with you on this one. When you find that cable that really locks in, it can make profound differences in the system's presentation too. For example, if the low level resolution, transparency or low end just isn't there to begin with, it doesn't make any difference how flat, etc the room is. (It's like the old less filling/no tastes great beer debate of yesteryear.) Everything in the assembling of a system needs to be carefully weighed and balanced.
Let's hope Ethan doesn't see this thread!
Who the hell cares what he has to say?
Why don't we just open up the forum to JJ and the rest of their ilk here too? Ethan was the ringleader of the group. Look at this video from AES where they proudly and arrogantly trash high-end audio:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
Is that what forum members really want here? If so, I think I'm in the wrong place.
It was this same ilk 50 years ago that told us that solid-state was perfect because of it vanishingly low distortion measurements -- despite people's ears bleeding. Ever see a vintage solid-state amplifier or preamplifier unit go for more than it sold for in 1960? No, and you never will. And as a matter of fact, Marantz had racks and racks of its early solid-state gear that had blown up in for repairs in its factory in Queens.
Then we can turn this place into Stereo Review and be happy. So were the people who believed the earth was flat too. I know I will be. I'll just sell all my gear and watch my bank account grow by leaps and bounds. Everything sounds the same except speakers because their perfect measurements told their ears so.
Too bad Hans Fantel and Julian Hirsch are dead. Then we could have invited them here too. Did I leave anybody out? Oh, forgot. Why don't we invite Arnie Krueger over here too so he can finish what Ethan begins.
This is beginning to look more and more like wreck.audio.high-end.
This is the reason that audio is dying and the iPod is just it's punctuation.
Give me a break!
Last edited:
Myles
For any human enterprise to advance challenges must be met... The world is littered with enterprises who have failed because of the echo chamber effect. I am not sure I want this forum to become one. I don't want everything I or anyone thinks to go unchallenged and repeated... I want to be challenged and I will challenge you and other people. The notion of “burden of proof” is central to a forum. One states something one must prove it or at least, explains it. Objectivity requires that opinions, belief systems, references be challenged. One may choose to cling to their own opinions, preferences or belief systems yet one has to back-up assertions and opinions with a modicum of rationale... Or qualifiers such as “in my opinion”, “to my ears”, “today I think” etc
I am not a flat-earther, I don’t think I am one, I don't think that most here who have joined this forum think every components sound the same. Some myself included believe and have not (yet) been proven wrong in our view that the best Digital is inherently superior to the current analog methods, for example. Some of us have challenged the sighted methodologies and frankly, the defenses for the (sighted) have been weak. Looking to show weaknesses in non-sighted methodologies rather than he strength of their supported ones.
Heck! even the scientific method is regularly challenged in many audiophile discussions here, something I find curious since Science is invoked the second it supports some point of view ... A rather peculiar (my own polite euphemism) argumentation strategy, some would have labeled "inconsistent". I will add that I am more than willing to change my positions if proven of their fallacy not though anecdotal references, a “trust me”, or a profession of SOTA superiority, whatever that may be.
High end audio has helped advance the Art and Science of Music Reproduction but it is not without its faults and they need to be pointed to... They need to be brought to the forefront not repeating ad infinitum that the Industry is run by Angels entirely devoted to the advancement of the Art… This High End Industry is for-profit and use the tools and means available to make a profit... these tools are too often unethical. I am not willing to give these tools and accompanying behavior a free-pass. We should not. Yet I have seen the tendency in many of us… The designers become almost god-like entities who cannot do any wrong and know more about their craft than anyone could... Measurements are damned: these people are above it … And sell this power for an obscene profit... Meanwhile great designers who dare challenge the High End Audio Orthodoxy are ignored (John Dunleavy among many others)… No! These need to be challenged continuously, regularly, logically and ethically. The challenges must be ethical, courteous and logical, in other words you must refute the arguments logically if possible, else. The people against High-End will also be thoroughly challenged and their point of view debated and argumented... They, also, have the burden of proof once they declare ANYTHING
I am sure this forum will continue to have these debates. We will make sure we weed the trolls out, whatever their persuasion... I don’t see ourselves turning into a wreck.high.end.org forum... I hope we don’t become the Asylum either …
For any human enterprise to advance challenges must be met... The world is littered with enterprises who have failed because of the echo chamber effect. I am not sure I want this forum to become one. I don't want everything I or anyone thinks to go unchallenged and repeated... I want to be challenged and I will challenge you and other people. The notion of “burden of proof” is central to a forum. One states something one must prove it or at least, explains it. Objectivity requires that opinions, belief systems, references be challenged. One may choose to cling to their own opinions, preferences or belief systems yet one has to back-up assertions and opinions with a modicum of rationale... Or qualifiers such as “in my opinion”, “to my ears”, “today I think” etc
I am not a flat-earther, I don’t think I am one, I don't think that most here who have joined this forum think every components sound the same. Some myself included believe and have not (yet) been proven wrong in our view that the best Digital is inherently superior to the current analog methods, for example. Some of us have challenged the sighted methodologies and frankly, the defenses for the (sighted) have been weak. Looking to show weaknesses in non-sighted methodologies rather than he strength of their supported ones.
Heck! even the scientific method is regularly challenged in many audiophile discussions here, something I find curious since Science is invoked the second it supports some point of view ... A rather peculiar (my own polite euphemism) argumentation strategy, some would have labeled "inconsistent". I will add that I am more than willing to change my positions if proven of their fallacy not though anecdotal references, a “trust me”, or a profession of SOTA superiority, whatever that may be.
High end audio has helped advance the Art and Science of Music Reproduction but it is not without its faults and they need to be pointed to... They need to be brought to the forefront not repeating ad infinitum that the Industry is run by Angels entirely devoted to the advancement of the Art… This High End Industry is for-profit and use the tools and means available to make a profit... these tools are too often unethical. I am not willing to give these tools and accompanying behavior a free-pass. We should not. Yet I have seen the tendency in many of us… The designers become almost god-like entities who cannot do any wrong and know more about their craft than anyone could... Measurements are damned: these people are above it … And sell this power for an obscene profit... Meanwhile great designers who dare challenge the High End Audio Orthodoxy are ignored (John Dunleavy among many others)… No! These need to be challenged continuously, regularly, logically and ethically. The challenges must be ethical, courteous and logical, in other words you must refute the arguments logically if possible, else. The people against High-End will also be thoroughly challenged and their point of view debated and argumented... They, also, have the burden of proof once they declare ANYTHING
I am sure this forum will continue to have these debates. We will make sure we weed the trolls out, whatever their persuasion... I don’t see ourselves turning into a wreck.high.end.org forum... I hope we don’t become the Asylum either …
Last edited:
Thanks Frantz
You have basically expounded upon the foundation on which WBF was established. As stated elsewhere here neither I or Amir will allow for troll to bring the foundation down. We have always stated here that debate is healthy as long as it is polite and without name calling.
You have basically expounded upon the foundation on which WBF was established. As stated elsewhere here neither I or Amir will allow for troll to bring the foundation down. We have always stated here that debate is healthy as long as it is polite and without name calling.
Very well stated, Steve.
And to my friend Frantz, I really, really enjoy reading your posts but, please, pretty please with sugar on top, more but shorter paragraphs
And to my friend Frantz, I really, really enjoy reading your posts but, please, pretty please with sugar on top, more but shorter paragraphs
Who the hell cares what he has to say?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
Is that what forum members really want here? If so, I think I'm in the wrong place.
It was this same ilk 50 years ago that told us that solid-state was perfect because of it vanishingly low distortion measurements -- despite people's ears bleeding. Ever see a vintage solid-state amplifier or preamplifier unit go for more than it sold for in 1960? No, and you never will. And as a matter of fact, Marantz had racks and racks of its early solid-state gear that had blown up in for repairs in its factory in Queens.
Then we can turn this place into Stereo Review and be happy. So were the people who believed the earth was flat too. I know I will be. I'll just sell all my gear and watch my bank account grow by leaps and bounds. Everything sounds the same except speakers because their perfect measurements told their ears so.
Too bad Hans Fantel and Julian Hirsch are dead. Then we could have invited them here too. Did I leave anybody out? Oh, forgot. Why don't we invite Arnie Krueger over here too so he can finish what Ethan begins.
This is beginning to look more and more like wreck.audio.high-end.
This is the reason that audio is dying and the iPod is just it's punctuation.
Give me a break!
Miles- i think the issue for me is that there isn't a ton of "science" behind cables. what you are talking about with amps, etc. is far different. i mean, we are still talking about capicitance, resistance, and inductance which is all basic physics.
i would like to see you guys at the mags call out the obscene pricing on some of this stuff at least. does that magical cable that you tried out equate to 10-15k that some are spending on speaker cables? 5k interconnects which now seem the norm? 5k power cords which are on their way? cable pricing inflation is the mosts egregious in this hobby and borders on the insane---at least a 10k amp weighs several hundred pounds and likely has hundreds of parts, schematics, R&D, etc. what does a 10k cable get me? that is the REAL the reason the high end is dying---people my age (33, the young guys most of you in the high end don't really care about) don't care about stupid cables and tweaks. they DO care about iPods--which by extension can lead them to digital servers, the rebirth of vinyl, quality headphones, etc.
when people saw my old Shunyatas they thought i was crazy---but if i showed them a Sooloos instead, they would be enthralled. see the difference?
cheers,
KeithR
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |