The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
High End Cables
Old 1st July 2014
  #181
j_j
Lives for gear
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucey View Post
Over the years you've bullied everyone who claimed there was such a thing as a better cable, or different cable.
Science is not bullying.
Old 1st July 2014
  #182
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
some micro dynamics also seem unnatural.
"Micro-dymanics"?

Your solid copper wire is affecting the dynamic response - which we normally have to use active circuitry for?
Do you know how?
Old 1st July 2014
  #183
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Yes I am missing some transparancy
Compared to what though?
Quote:
and there is something bothering me in the high end, resonances, some micro dynamics also seem unnatural.
But you've been unable to capture this in any sort of measurement or recording?
Quote:
I finally soldered a short pair of the new individually shielded starquad GOthams.
Preliminary listening tests would indicate that this one could solve quite a few problems !
Why not do a loopback with both cables and use RightMark Audio Analyzer or try a null test? Surely you must have some way of capturing this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Hodgson View Post
Your quote is of a customer quote on Grimm's TPR page.

the customer quotes however appear to be dripping with myth and perception bias.
I can't speak for the product whatsoever, but any company who would post a ridiculous testimonial like that on their page is clearly interested in deceiving customers for their own gain.
Old 1st July 2014
  #184
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_j View Post
Science is not bullying.
There is plenty of good science in many cables out there. Acoustic Zen's Robert Lee is a scientist. And a cellist. He gets it. Many do.

But the sound of music in a chain is not based in simple scientific measure, so that argument is rather moot ... it's about synergy between components and the emotional result. Music making is about emotions not science. We are not proving how good music is to people. They need to feel it.

So if you like a cable and your work is better for it ... then go for it.

It's really not something where science is under attack or any form of dogmatism needs to create wars of words.

And yet ... cable threads do ...
Old 1st July 2014
  #185
Lives for gear
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Grimm is a no BS company making no BS cables.

_They_ certainly aren’t making any crazy and impossible claims for the wire.
As I already noted... but they're very happy to make use of their customers' crazy and impossible claims for the wire.

Strip away the BS they allow and encourage though, stick with what the engineers actually said, and you're left with what appear to be excellently engineered products at what are probably realistic prices.
Old 1st July 2014
  #186
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
Compared to what though?
The real sound of the real instrument. Or my silver cable.
Every step over the last 12 years has been to increase the neutrality/resolution/transparancy of my monitoring chain.
I'm getting pretty close...

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
But you've been unable to capture this in any sort of measurement or recording?
Why not do a loopback with both cables and use RightMark Audio Analyzer or try a null test? Surely you must have some way of capturing this?
Lazyness... Maybe also because I was not aware of this audio analyzer.
A null test is difficult with resampling/reclocking DA converters.

I have mobile sessions the next days. I'll try to measure something when I get back.
Old 1st July 2014
  #187
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
...I always have to wonder if there isn’t some insecurity at work when it comes to audio cables...
...Fortunately blameless interconnects are cheap and easily available.
Unfortunately there's also plenty of cable that both measures and sounds like crap that many seem to thump their chests in denial of.
Old 2nd July 2014
  #188
j_j
Lives for gear
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Unfortunately there's also plenty of cable that both measures and sounds like crap that many seem to thump their chests in denial of.
Oh yeah. Part of the audio industry proves that you can do anything wrong, even something so simple as wire.
Old 2nd July 2014
  #189
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Grimm is a no BS company making no BS cables.

_They_ certainly aren’t making any crazy and impossible claims for the wire.

I always have to wonder if there isn’t some insecurity at work when it comes to audio cables. I mean if you can’t get a great sound with $1 a foot cables, you need to look somewhere else - maybe anywhere else - for the answer.

Then spend maybe $5 a foot and move on.

Fortunately blameless interconnects are cheap and easily available.
I'm confused on the logic here Dave ... are you not using a cable that's not Belden or similar? Grimm, right?

And are you not the person who said for years that cable tone was all bull****, not just the marketing but the concept ... and if it was real they would use fancy cables on the space shuttle or some other form of smart ass quip?

But now you like Grimm?

But it's about "insecurity" when people are into cables?


Are you not part of the insecure "we" now? And how it is that you can alter your position of a decade or more and still insult people who beat you to the same conclusion?
Old 2nd July 2014
  #190
Lives for gear
 
hmiller's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucey View Post
I'm confused on the logic here Dave ... are you not using a cable that's not Belden or similar? Grimm, right?

And are you not the person who said for years that cable tone was all bull****, not just the marketing but the concept ... and if it was real they would use fancy cables on the space shuttle or some other form of smart ass quip?

But now you like Grimm?

But it's about "insecurity" when people are into cables?


Are you not part of the insecure "we" now? And how it is that you can alter your position of a decade or more and still insult people who beat you to the same conclusion?
Cable "tone" is bull****. You get the most transparent cable you can. The Grimm is better than 1800F. It measures better and is confirmed as such by listening. What's the confusing part?
Old 2nd July 2014
  #191
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntley Miller View Post
Cable "tone" is bull****. You get the most transparent cable you can. The Grimm is better than 1800F. It measures better and is confirmed as such by listening. What's the confusing part?
The confusing part is "cable tone is bull****" followed by "better and is confirmed as such by listening"
How can you combine A with B ?

On a side note, the new Gotham cable I am testing (still no measurements, I am in a recording session) is coming out good.

Of course all of this is anecdotal then.
But what I heared was confirmed by my wife (not knowing what she was listening to, or comparing).
Two days later, the exact same thing was confirmed by the guy that designed my loudspeakers (and is finishing an incredibly transparant compact speaker as I write this).

So if cable tone does not exist, telepathy does

The good part of this, Gotham is a solid engineering, no audiophile bull**** company. They even go as far as denying there are cable differences (except for shielding) The new cable is more expensive, but still cheap next to "highend" offerings.

The quote from the Gotham engineer has to be taken with a grain of salt. They changed some stuff (eg wire gauge and nr of strands) which have to be a decision based on sonics, because they changed them in the wrong way of logical evolution and cable flexibility... They also changed the type of insulator, which seems weird as there was nothing wrong with the PE they used ?
Old 2nd July 2014
  #192
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
The real test here would be if you can tell the GAC-2aes from the new one consistently in blind testing. Why don't you give that a try?
Old 2nd July 2014
  #193
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

That would even not be a challenge.
I have done dac tests where the difference between some dacs was smaller than between these two cables ...
Old 2nd July 2014
  #194
Lives for gear
 
FabienTDR's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Can someone simply record a some of these "impressively good and bad" cables? Just for objective comparison. It would be interesting to properly analyse what exactly is going on, without any extra terrestrial voodoo discovery channel science bull****, subjective bias and religious views.

Test-file attached:
http://www.tokyodawn.net/labs/Analyze.wav
Old 2nd July 2014
  #195
Lives for gear
 

what gets me is there isn't any quantifiable proof that said cable is better. you want to prove to me that a set of cables is better fine and dandy. Why not set up a flat omni mic something like a dpa, earthworks, a measurement microphone etc. point it at your speakers record the speakers in the room then switch to cable set b and record the speakers again compare the output of both then come back and play me the file difference of said fancy cable vs lamp cord or cheap speaker cables. I'll wait
Old 3rd July 2014
  #196
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntley Miller View Post
Cable "tone" is bull****. You get the most transparent cable you can.
Either they are all equally "transparent" ... or they are not. There can be no "you get the most ..."
Old 3rd July 2014
  #197
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
That would even not be a challenge.
I have done dac tests where the difference between some dacs was smaller than between these two cables ...
You should be able to capture the difference then by doing a loopback recording. Can you try that with a 30s clip where you can hear a difference then post the GAC-2AES and the new star quad? Shouldn't take you more than 5-10m to setup and do it. Just make sure to use the same converter channels for both recordings.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #198
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

The problem is I do not have a ADC converter that does not use yet another type of cable. My grace m802+AD uses some generic cable internally, and my other AD converters use d25 connectors, which are all made up by either the silver cable or the Gotham AES cable.

So that loopback test is not the same situation.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #199
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
The problem is I do not have a ADC converter that does not use yet another type of cable. ...
That is not a problem. How does having a short length of cable C in the path when comparing cables A and B invalidate the result?
Old 3rd July 2014
  #200
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Because you are listening to A+C and B+C.

When I put the cable under test in my monitoring chain, I purely listen to A or B.
I could try and solder up a d25 connector or two, just with one channel. With the two cables under test. That would take more then 10 minutes though...
Old 3rd July 2014
  #201
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Because you are listening to A+C and B+C.

When I put the cable under test in my monitoring chain, I purely listen to A or B.
Sure, if you only listen to stuff you recorded yourself. All other music will be recorded through endless amounts of unknown cable.

The most disappointing thing about the cable debate is that any of the people who claim these sort of differences (between known, good, properly functioning cables in an environment that isn't problematic) never seemed to be able to capture this in a way where it can be clearly heard by others, identified in blind testing, or measured. Meanwhile we're all very familiar with psychological expectation bias, so it's never made a very convincing case.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #202
Lives for gear
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Because you are listening to A+C and B+C.
If A sounds different to B then A+C will sound different to B+C, and it's the difference we want to check out.

For C to nullify any differences between A and B it would have to completely remove any audio frequencies where the differences existed, and I doubt very much that is happening (something would have to be broken).
Old 3rd July 2014
  #203
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Hodgson View Post
If A sounds different to B then A+C will sound different to B+C, and it's the difference we want to check out.

For C to nullify any differences between A and B it would have to completely remove any audio frequencies where the differences existed, and I doubt very much that is happening.
I don't think so. I think A+C and B+C are basically totally new, non-existant cable assemblies. Your conclusion, in the absence of any scientific understanding of what is happening exactly, may be wrong.

I still find this discussion amazing. Gearslutz is full of comparisons between highend mic preamps and converters. In my recent test between Grace m802/DAD ax32 and Merging Horus, the differences were not bigger than between two sets of cable.

Yet, everyone seems to be able to hear how good the Horus is, but no differences between cable. And everyong uses standard, not-known cable connected to those d25 IO connectors. The problem with these is, you cannot use any cable you like. It could very well be these three micpreAD units actually sound a lot more different, but are being limited by the d25 assemblies.

IMO current preamp and converter technology is on the edge of measurability as well. And still so many Gearslutz can hear big differences.
And that is accepted by all.

Up to the 60s or 70s, it was generally considered a fact that power amps all sounded the same
Old 3rd July 2014
  #204
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Because you are listening to A+C and B+C.

When I put the cable under test in my monitoring chain, I purely listen to A or B.
I could try and solder up a d25 connector or two, just with one channel. With the two cables under test. That would take more then 10 minutes though...
The whole point of this is to demonstrate differences.
A zero-null for instance would eliminate C from the picture, if it were capable of causing any detectable change in FR, or not.

So, you're worried that you can hear a few inches of metal, "hook-up wire", inside a shielded enclosure that's not in contact with a dielectric/shield... (so it's not a cable - capable of capacitance).

Can you hear solder?
Do you think signals are just filtered by the metal they are passing through?

How do you think wire and conduction works?
Old 3rd July 2014
  #205
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post

... Your conclusion, in the absence of any scientific understanding of what is happening exactly, may be wrong.
...
And that is accepted by all.

Up to the 60s or 70s, it was generally considered a fact that power amps all sounded the same
Interesting assertion, in context.

Not from what I've seen.

And that third quote. I haven't heard that either.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #206
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Ransom View Post
.

So, you're worried that you can hear a few inches of metal, hook-up wire, inside a shielded enclosure that's not in contact with a dielectric/shield... (so it's not a cable).
That is not at all what I am saying.
Current multichannel preamps and AD converters all use the d25 connectors, instead of XLR IO.

You are stuck to a external d25 to 8x XLR cable loom...

The m802 connects the mic pre cards to the AD option through 8 standard fixed-installation balanced cables. Internal in the chassis, but it is 35 cm of wire anyway. It is not on the pcb, it is standard, two conductor plus shield cable.

I believe very much in what the shield does or does not do, in inductive effects between the tightly twisted conductors etc.
The new Gotham starquad is basically 4 coax cables in a common extra shield.
Electrically that has to be different to a standard balanced cable ?

Yet Gotham's own specs are exactly the same as the standard starquad... I should ask that engineer how come that the conductor-conductor capacitance is the same. In the new version there are two extra 100% shields (grounded) between any two conductors.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #207
nms
Lives for gear
 
nms's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
I still find this discussion amazing. Gearslutz is full of comparisons between highend mic preamps and converters. In my recent test between Grace m802/DAD ax32 and Merging Horus, the differences were not bigger than between two sets of cable.
Yet, everyone seems to be able to hear how good the Horus is, but no differences between cable.
You don't see the difference? Pick any converter or preamp and you can easily measure differences in several ways. Can you come up with any logical reason as to why we shouldn't be able to measure such differences with different cables then so long as we're talking about cables we know are good, being used in typical mastering environment implementations for instance? If you have interference problems, then that requires its own attention.. but past that.. I'm at a loss as to how you can find such preference between short runs of Gotham's best cable assemblies. If you can measure it or record it for us in some way where it can be proven that would be very interesting. I foresee this going the same as it always does though. A lot of people won't even attempt the loopback recording or blind test for worry the difference will disappear.
Quote:
It could very well be these three micpreAD units actually sound a lot more different, but are being limited by the d25 assemblies.
That's REALLY reaching. Who here could honestly say with a straight face "these units sound the same, you might need a more high end cable to hear the difference between them".

Quote:
IMO current preamp and converter technology is on the edge of measurability as well.
It is most certainly not. You can measure noise, THD, IMD, Dynamic range, FR, transient response, etc etc.
Old 3rd July 2014
  #208
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant Ransom View Post
Interesting assertion, in context.

Not from what I've seen.

And that third quote. I haven't heard that either.
Interestingly - alarmlingly - it is even current:

Solid state amplifier sound differences: Myth or truth? | Steve Hoffman Music Forums

The 70s quote I read 15 years ago in such magazines as Hifi-News&RR, in a series about vintage hifi. They are all in the garbage bin now...
Old 3rd July 2014
  #209
Lives for gear
 
Grant Ransom's Avatar
 

Isn't that a Hifi enthusiast forum?




Wow.
Buzzkill. Really sorry about the double posts. I hit the submit button and nothing was happening. reloaded, checked my post had appeared and it hadn't. repeated.

Some dodgy code here...
Old 3rd July 2014
  #210
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nms View Post
It is most certainly not. You can measure noise, THD, IMD, Dynamic range, FR, transient response, etc etc.
Have you seen the specs of the latest units ?
From the Benchmark DAC2 manual :

"The extraordinary performance of the DAC2 is demonstrated by the FFT plot shown above. There
is no sign of any AC hum, there are no idle tones, and there are no spurious tones detected at a measurement limit of -160 dBFS."

Jitter is also below the -140 dB measurement threshold.

"This plot demonstrates the very low harmonic distortion produced by the DAC2 at signal levels
ranging from -14 dBFS to 0 dBFS. All variations below -4 dBFS are due to the measurement limits
of the AP 2700 system. The peaks at -13 dBFS are due to an AP 2700 gain range change. In
almost all listening environments, THD will be below the threshold of hearing. The DAC2 is
virtually uncolored by any trace of harmonic distortion."

etc etc

I would conclude, there would be NO SONIC difference between a DAC2 and ANY other units with similar specs.

How many gearslutz would except that ?

In my book, the DAC2 is basically transparant.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump