Sonic differences between cables??
Yak
Posted 2007-04-14 9:18 PM (#105414)
Subject: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347

Location: Reno, NV
Is there really any perceivable sound quality differences between cables for guitar, either acoustic or electric?

I was into audio equipment at one time and the biggest debates were always over speaker and interconnect cables. Some say that you can't tell the difference from lamp cord, other say they can tell the difference between every cable. Hi-Fi audio cables can be outrageously expensive, into the several hundreds of dollars for less than a foot.

So, when it comes to guitar cables, do you think that paying for a "better" cable will get you better sound?

Here is a quote from Monster, who in the Hi-End audio industry is though of as junk cables. (comparatively)

"A cable made to deliver the warmth, harmonics, and sustain of your acoustic with precision and clarity. Magnetic fields in ordinary cables cause frequency and phase distortions, but the patented 3-way Time Correct windings in the Monster Acoustic Instrument Cable reject interference protecting all of your instrument's transient attack, full output, and critical overtones.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Tupperware
Posted 2007-04-14 10:38 PM (#105415 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
January 2005
Posts: 4903

Location: Phoenix AZ
My theory:

Those who pay for chi-chi cables will definately hear the difference and revel in the fact that they were so smart and well off. Those who buy the cheap shit will probably never know the difference, even though they are probably better musicians to start with. I buy middle of the road stuff. I think my mic and guitar cables are mogami, or some such thing. Not terribly expensive but durable and they feel well made.

I think on hi-fi systems it makes more of a difference and here I have definately gone overboard. I worked in an audio salon while in college, so the employee discount + what ever I could fit in my pockets definately helped. I think the litz wire headshell cables (all 1 inch of them) was something like $300. Although I'm quite sure I didn't pay for them. I have no idea what the cable between my pre and power amp is (it's been 30 years) but it looks like a friggin fire hose and came packaged in a milled aluminium attache case.

Anyway, it's mostly marketing spew. I read in the absolute sound once that they estimated that 10% of the geeks that paid thousands on audio cables probably mixed up the polarity on them and never knew the difference.

Dave
Top of the page Bottom of the page
gh1
Posted 2007-04-14 11:14 PM (#105416 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 972

Location: PDX
From the Gear Page:

The main factor is capacitance. There is a small amount of inductance and resistance in a guitar cable too, but it's negligible compared to that of the pickups and pots (and the amp's input impedance), so it probably makes little or no difference.

Big fat expensive cables with high-quality, thick insulators generally have lower capacitance than cheapos with skinny ones - it's the distance between the core and the shield that matters, not the overall diameter - the outer covering makes no difference. If you look inside a cheap 'fat' cable you'll often see that it's mostly a fat outer covering. The type of insulator material makes a difference too.

But some expensive cables seem to have fairly high capacitance.

With any kind of cable, capacitance is also directly linked to length. One thing that's quite funny is to get and old curly cable and stretch it right out to see how long it really is...

The capacitance is important because not only is it simple high-pass-to-ground filter (just like a guitar tone control), so it takes off top end, it also interacts with the pickups in the guitar and actually changes their tone - it's not just a subtractive effect afterwards. This is because the pickups are basically inductors, and an inductor and a capacitor form a simple tuned resonant circuit, which has a peak frequency. The larger the capacitance, the lower the peak frequency.

You don't necessarily want the lowest possible capacitance BTW - you might think that it would always give the 'purest' and most 'transparent' tone, but it can also sound shrill or sterile.

From an electrical point of view, the cable is as much part of the guitar as the pickups, pots and tone capacitor. It can change the tone just as much, and in the same sorts of ways. You don't usually want 1Meg pots, even though they do load the pickups less than 250Ks.

You're best to choose with your ears, not based on price. If you're lucky, the ones you like best might not be the most expensive... I prefer Horizons actually.


FWIW

_____
gh1
Top of the page Bottom of the page
alpep
Posted 2007-04-14 11:31 PM (#105417 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583

Location: NJ
I think that you can have wire that maximizes your connections. do I think the wire knows that you are putting an acoustic guitar or jazz guitar or keyboard etc through them? absolutely not.

back in the day.... whirlwind were the first to come out with a premium cable that I can remember. they were great, heavy duty and had a lifetime warranty. they were generally belden cable and it was the industry standard for many years. I am not sure belden is still in business. Now the big deal is monster cable, they cost a bunch but they have a lifetime warranty, if anything goes bad you send it back and get a replacement no questions asked.

I also have some george L cables but they keep getting tangled up for me.

best advice is to buy the best cables you can afford, but rememeber all those heavy duty cables probably come out of the same factory in china.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
an4340
Posted 2007-04-14 11:44 PM (#105418 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
May 2003
Posts: 4389

Location: Capital District, NY, USA Minor Outlying Islands
Well ... you have to get it out of your system, buy one cheapo and one expensive. Practically speaking, you may find that if your cords stay in your studio and don't move around too much, they'll work great. If your jumping around on stage the expensive stuff will last longer.

Sonically, if one of the cheap ones give me trouble, I chuck it and get a replacement and the problem disappears.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Old Man Arthur
Posted 2007-04-14 11:44 PM (#105419 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??



Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 10777

Location: Keepin' It Weird in Portland, OR
Personal Po' Boy Experience-- I found out why that 20' cable was only $6!

Opinion-- If you are on stage, with a bunch of electrical equipment, I would think that you would need better insulation to avoid interference. The cheapass cable picked up a hum when piled-up with a bunch of effects cables and next to the amp. Add that to the single coil pick-ups, and... it was annoying.

But if you are asking if there is a difference between cable FOR acoustic guitars and FOR electric guitars... I have no Idea. :confused:
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Northcountry
Posted 2007-04-15 12:11 AM (#105420 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??
Joined:
February 2004
Posts: 2487

The connectors can be very problematic on the cheaper cords causing squeals and dangerous amp popping and crackle. Cheap cords with little insulation (very skinny) can crap out if you step on them a couple a times. I buy Whirlwind cords but for me I only buy cords that the dealer will let me take out of the wrapping and feel how they unwind and lay out on the floor. I like the fabric wrapped cords and some of them are very flexible and do not seem to constantly kink and form loops. Some are beautiful but the material is just to stiff and the cords do not bend and follow me when I am playing. Not sure if the platinum or gold coated cords actually make any difference or not?? Anyone who spends $60 or more on a cord please write a note in here and let us know if they are worth the money. I can't imagine they are.

Randy
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Slartibartfast
Posted 2007-04-15 12:34 AM (#105421 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51

Location: Arizona
A little background for what it's worth, and take it just FWIW: I'm an electrical engineer and have worked in communications for more than a couple of decades. Cables can be important when you're trying to keep distortion down at high frequency across hundreds of megahertz of bandwidth or more. Stretching a cable can be bad, etc., etc. But for the most part, nobody pays anything close to the outrageous prices seen in the audio market for cable that, IMHO, has to have much tighter specs.

I can't believe it's that hard to keep a signal clean across 20kHz or so at low frequency, when it's not that hard to keep a gigahertz of BW clean at microwave frequencies.

Shielding from interference is trivial and the whole point of using coaxial cable is so that the signal goes down the center and the ground shield surrounds it and keeps all the crap out. As long as the shield is connected well at both ends (sometimes it's not which explains hum on occassion) you can't ask for much more.

In my opinion, FWIW, cheap cable will have cheaper materials which may not hold up as well under abuse. What can go wrong? If a cable gets stretched or pinched so that the geometry of the shield around the center conductor changes, it -may- (or may not) introduce some distortion by changing the impedance characteristics of the cable. A more expensive cable should have better materials that resist kinking and stretching better than a cheap cable may. A really good cable should have decent flexibility so that you can move around (i.e., not be too stiff) and still be able to resist kinking and stretching, and have good, solid connectors (plugs) at each end.

FWIW, even el-cheapo cables are generally not too bad these days, and I really don't know why a hobbyist/casual player wouldn't just stick with reasonably cheap or medium cost cables. On the off chance that a cable gets bad due to abuse or a mechanical failure in a plug, one can keep a lot of spares around for the cost of one of those "high-end" cables that has a lot more invested in marketing and advertising to make up. (Yeah, IMHO the only thing "better" about those really high end cables is the intensity of the marketing and hype around them.)

I don't follow the argument cited above about the capacitance in the cable. The cable has a characteristic impedance, but you can get the proper impedance even with cheap materials. I don't know why a new cheap cable would be electrically much or any different than an expensive cable unless the ends (plugs) weren't well attached. After a lot of abuse, the expensive cable may have resisted kinking/stretching and still have an impedance closer to what it started with, while the cheap cable's kinks and stretches may have changed its characteristic impedance.

But, hey, if YOU can hear the difference (or think you can) and can sleep better at night for buying an expensive cable, more power to ya. I buy low-priced stuff (not necessarily the cheapest) on sale at GC that feels flexible yet stout. If it craps out, I can afford to replace it because I don't have a ton invested in it.

Again, take all that FWIW, YMMV, don't try this at home, etc., etc.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
numbfingers
Posted 2007-04-15 2:55 AM (#105422 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 1132

Location: NW Washington State
I've used some old Bill Lawrence cable and plugs for years. They've worked well for me, but I'm just a living room guitarist and don't stress them much. It's easy to make up cables of any length without soldering. A kit is pretty cheap: http://www.billlawrence.com/Pages/Connector_Cable.htm I think that Lawrence knows his stuff but the comments about capacitance and resonance look like marketing nonsense to me.

I think that the claims about low capacitance are a throwback to the old days when you could buy some crappy cables that had enough capacitance to really roll off the highs. Another thing that used to be important was to get a cable with a 100% coverage braided shield, instead of a spiral wrapping of wire. Who knows, maybe some of the cheapo Chinese cables today have these problems.

Slarti, I don't think I've seen characteristic impedance specified for audio cables the way it is for RF or network cables. Maybe there's some other term used.

-Steve W.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jason_S
Posted 2007-04-15 4:06 AM (#105423 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 2804

Location: ranson,wva
for what its worth i use george l's for my pedal board abd to conect me amps to the the mixer and monster cables for the main in put...i doubt im any help as usuial,......jason
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Slipkid
Posted 2007-04-15 9:35 AM (#105424 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??



Joined:
September 2003
Posts: 9301

Location: south east Michigan
Here is a good excuse to pull one of my favorite posts out of the ol' vault.
Brian T
Member
Member # 1460
posted January 18, 2005 03:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It depends on the overtone you desire. For example, cables made with "Brazilian Copper" favor the darker bass side of the spectrum. Cables with Adirondack or Austrian plastic on the insulating sheaths enhance sustain. Some cables even contain fossilized mammoth dung as a dielectric spacer between the jack tip and shield, these are preferred by finger-style players.

Now the very best tonally responsive copper is "free range copper". This type of copper is only harvested in it's natural state, when found laying on the ground. You see mining copper with huge machinery drives out the free radical valiance electrons which give free range copper it's pure harmonic tap tone. You can actually pick up a piece of free range copper and tap it with a hammer and hear it's natural harmonics. Mined copper sounds weaker when tapped because the free electrons have been traumitized by the in-humane mining process. Some people claim that placing mined copper in front of speakers and playing Devo records repeatedly at max volume can restore some of the free valance electrons and result in a purer tap tone. But I think it's best to demand the real thing when buying a cable, pure book-matched free range copper.
Also most people agree you have to actually play the cable before buying, ideally several different cables, with a friend across the room who can comment on the quality of the harmonic overtones. Compare cables of different color and length before buying, and dont forget to get a cable humidifier to keep your cable from cracking.

Brian T
Member
Member # 1460

posted January 19, 2005 08:28 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sadly, some cablers still compromise ethics and dope free range copper with antikryptonite, some people will do anything for money. But buyers need to be aware that under the CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species), even the artist can be fined for merely possessing a cable containing doped copper.
A friend of mine had a show at Yellowstone Lodge. There was a Ranger in the audience who caught a glint of the tell-tale maize-umber color that is reflected by doped copper. Next thing he knows my buddy is in hand-cuffs, thrown in the back of a van and jailed in nearby Bozeman Montana. His cable was cut into tiny pieces, and some over-zealous Green Peace workers actually poked their fingers through the cones of his PA speakers. It took fourteen months and over seven grand in fees and fines for him to finally regain his freedom. Dont risk it man, good sound just aint worth the price.

But if you really want the pure, undoped, ring of free range copper, Behringer has a new cable-modeler pre-amp. It uses 24 bit digital signaling to actually duplicate (more-or-less) the sounds of sixteen classic cables. I havn't tried it yet but I am told it comes pretty close to the real thing, at least for studio use. My buddy (now reformed) uses one and really likes the Jimmy Hendrix melted-rubber with lighter fluid highlights setting. He also said that the Jan and Dean corroded sea-salt setting really recaptures the buzz and crackle of that time.
----------------------
Brian was really on a roll.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
moody, p.i.
Posted 2007-04-15 9:45 AM (#105425 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15682

Location: SoCal
Brian needed to get a life.....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
colt357
Posted 2007-04-15 12:24 PM (#105426 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 713

Location: Alberta, Canada
OOOOOH...is that modeler still available. They probably have a new version that doesn't even come close to the original. I never seem to get in on the ground floor of the really good stuff.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Yak
Posted 2007-04-15 1:17 PM (#105427 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347

Location: Reno, NV
LOL! ... that post was a little before my time. Im glad you brought it back.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Brian T
Posted 2007-04-15 1:29 PM (#105428 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
May 2003
Posts: 425

Location: SE Michigan
I agree that there are high quality cables and low quality cables. And it is probably a good idea to steer towards the high quality ones. But for Monster cables to claim that one cable is better suited to bass while another is better suited to acoustic guitar is pure Horse Feathers. And paying $90 for a cable makes about as much sense as watching the WWF.

I think the same holds true for all the exotic nut and saddle materials. The people who get sucked into this suff probably have too much time and money on there hands anyway, and they despretly need to believe that these things make a difference, so it is like the placebo effect in medicine.

Want to know the best way to get the absolute best sound? PRACTICE A LOT.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
alpep
Posted 2007-04-15 2:01 PM (#105429 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583

Location: NJ
man I love the WWF

but vintage from the 50's till when cyndy lauper got involved
Top of the page Bottom of the page
cliff
Posted 2007-04-15 6:25 PM (#105430 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 14842

Location: NJ
Bruno & Andre . . .
Top of the page Bottom of the page
alpep
Posted 2007-04-15 6:33 PM (#105431 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583

Location: NJ
killer kowalski
haystacks calhoun
george "the animal" steel
iron shiek
sargent slaughter
gorilla monsoon
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Paul Templeman
Posted 2007-04-15 6:54 PM (#105432 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750

Location: Scotland
Doesn't matter now good the cable is, any unbalanced (2 conductor) signal will begin to degrade after 20 feet or so. That said all but the most finely-tuned ears will not be able to detect this. Bottom line is avoid cheap crappy cords, buy the best you can afford and keep the cable runs as short as is practical and/or use a DI box. For live performance purposes the benefits of paying for really expensive audiophile-quality guitar cables are subject to the laws of diminishing returns when the rest of the signal chain is in the equation, especially for electric guitar where there's amps, distortion pedals and a bunch of other stuff to colour the sound.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
ProfessorBB
Posted 2007-04-16 9:27 AM (#105433 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??



Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 5881

Location: Colorado Rocky Mountains
Originally posted by alpep:
killer kowalski
haystacks calhoun
george "the animal" steel
iron shiek
sargent slaughter
gorilla monsoon
Freddie Blassie?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Yak
Posted 2007-04-16 9:34 AM (#105434 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 347

Location: Reno, NV
Ricky the Steamboat Dragon
Moon Dog Spot
The British Bulldogs
Macho Man Randy Savage
Brutus the Barber Beefcake
Ravishing Rick Rude
Top of the page Bottom of the page
ProfessorBB
Posted 2007-04-16 9:43 AM (#105435 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??



Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 5881

Location: Colorado Rocky Mountains
Back on cables, one thing is for real sure . . . don't confuse speaker cable, no matter how heavy duty, with guitar cable.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Steve
Posted 2007-04-16 10:08 AM (#105436 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
July 2002
Posts: 1900

Notwithstanding all the tech-talk, my concerns with cable were always 'insulation' and 'signal loss'. Other than that, anyone can eventually train their ear to hear the smallest differences and anamolies. Like working the soundboard in a studio, all the focus and concentration makes you tired at the end of the day...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
FlicKreno aka Solid Top
Posted 2007-04-16 12:54 PM (#105437 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 2491

Location: Copenhagen Denmark
Differences Cables in between can be Enormous..when U do not use the right ones..., I got some Heavy Duty Electrical wire,the type to be used for outside,wich has a very High Capacitance,which was clearly audible when used on my speakers,now I `ve used it on my Laney klipp 40,making my Jazzbox sound like a leadguitar,I bought some used stuff a while back which included the most expensive guitar cable money can buy,I had been thinking about buying one of those,so I was Very Happy to get it practically for nothing,compared to my standard cable (DAP audio),I do not hear much difference if any at all,just to say..the Cable jungle is a BIG One.. ;)

Vic
Top of the page Bottom of the page
brainslag
Posted 2007-04-16 2:29 PM (#105438 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 1138

Location: CT
Buy the real expensive cable, because Someone , might Possibly be able to tell a Very Slight bit of difference in an ideal situation. . . . Then plug it into your pedal board with dozens of stomp boxes - hopefully connected well with each other, some plugged in, some using 9v batteries of dubious age, then into the volume pedal, then the wah, then into the rack effects, then to the input of your amp (which is using a different mains circuit than everything else), out the speaker into a mic, with more questionable cable, to the board (where someone left the HPF in), back to the monitor as well as the house. Then throw in the ....blah....blah...

If you play live, it should be able to handle the guitar signal and a little abuse and perform well. After that, there are so many other things that will color the sound more than the cable itself.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
elginacres
Posted 2007-04-21 12:01 AM (#105439 - in reply to #105414)
Subject: Re: Sonic differences between cables??


Joined:
July 2005
Posts: 1609

Location: Colorado
Wahoo McDaniel
Top of the page Bottom of the page