[bigshot]

Durability should be the main factor then when considering how much to spend.

In a portable rig, yes. In a static installation, not so much.

 

[Ryokan]

In a portable rig, yes. In a static installation, not so much.

Horses for courses.

 

[LisaShayBrown]

In my defense, I tried, before realizing this was in "Sound Science". My experience with Mogami Gold xlr's is very favorable. I would highly recommend them. I won't get to how they sound in this thread, but it's worth every penny in my opinion.

at our studios we have great luck with mogami as mic-level cable. can't speak about how it is at interconnect line level, but probably equally good as a guess.

 

[bigshot]

Equally good as just about anything else I guess.

 

[Edric Li]

Ordered a bunch of World Best Cables from Amazon, all in the shortest length 0.5ft, some with different RCA connectors. On the same cable (Gotham GAC-4/1), I was surprised that I could hear the difference between connectors. Among the different cables with the same connector (Neutrik Rean), I could hear a difference between most of them, with the Canare GS-6 being distinctively worse than the rest. Among the rest (various Mogami, Gotham, Canare and Van Damme), there is a difference but I can't say if one is better than the other. A little extra bass or treble here and there, but no pareto improvement whatsoever.

 

[gregorio]

Ordered a bunch of World Best Cables from Amazon, all in the shortest length 0.5ft, some with different RCA connectors. On the same cable (Gotham GAC-4/1), I was surprised that I could hear the difference between connectors.

If you were “surprised” (or even if you weren’t), how did you verify that you could actually “hear the difference between connectors” rather than just experience a difference due to some bias/perceptual error?

Assuming the connector isn’t wired incorrectly or damaged/broken/faulty in some way, the actual difference is minuscule, requiring expensive specialised equipment to even detect and is so tiny it can’t even be resolved into sound, let alone be audible.

G

 

[Edric Li]

If you were “surprised” (or even if you weren’t), how did you verify that you could actually “hear the difference between connectors” rather than just experience a difference due to some bias/perceptual error?

Assuming the connector isn’t wired incorrectly or damaged/broken/faulty in some way, the actual difference is minuscule, requiring expensive specialised equipment to even detect and is so tiny it can’t even be resolved into sound, let alone be audible.

G

Like anyone that's been in this hobby long enough, I've developed playlists/routines to listen to gears. The difference between the connectors in this case was quite large, enough that I didn't bother to blind test. Can't say the same for the different brand of cables. One possible explanation was that the cables were so short (0.5ft) that the impact on sound is predominantly by the connectors, whereas in a usual length (say 3ft, 6ft) it is by the cables.

If you are not sure if you can hear the difference between connectors, you can try to apply the idea of the DA/AD-loop test: daisy-chain a bunch of 1/8-1/4 and 1/4-1/8 adapters between your headphone and amplifier, and see if you can hear a difference between the good quality ones (like the Furutech CF adapters) and the cheap ones. This would really amplify the impact of connectors.

 

[gregorio]

The difference between the connectors in this case was quite large, enough that I didn't bother to blind test.

Firstly, what difference? Did you verify there was an actual audio/sound difference rather than just a difference in your experience/perception? Secondly, why did the difference being “quite large” preclude you from bothering to do any objective measurements or controlled listening tests, do you think that perceptual biases/errors cannot be “quite large” and if so, why?

One possible explanation was that the cables were so short (0.5ft) that the impact on sound is predominantly by the connectors, whereas in a usual length (say 3ft, 6ft) it is by the cables.

There are any number of “possible explanations”, from a faulty connector to the potential influence of ghosts or aliens. Of course, some possible explanations can be discounted due to scientific evidence/knowledge, at least until the all the probable explanations have been entirely eliminated. Unfortunately you haven’t done that, you’ve skipped over the most probable explanations and jumped on “one possible explanation” that is amongst the very least probable. In fact, you’ve done worse than that, you’ve missed out an entire logical step entirely. You’ve jumped straight into presenting “one possible explanation” for ”the impact on sound” before ascertaining if there even is any “impact on sound” (or the analogue signal).

If you are not sure if you can hear the difference between connectors, you can try to apply the idea of the DA/AD-loop test: daisy-chain a bunch of 1/8-1/4 and 1/4-1/8 adapters between your headphone and amplifier, and see if you can hear a difference between the good quality ones (like the Furutech CF adapters) and the cheap ones. This would really amplify the impact of connectors.

I have done numerous DA/AD loop tests, on different RCA connectors, different XLR connectors, other different connector types and different cables too, over the course of more than two decades. And, I’ve compared the results of those with a null test and on occasion, a controlled listening test. As you’re obviously aware of an DA/AD loop-back test, why didn’t you use one to ascertain if there was actually an impact on the analogue signal?

G

Edit: My responses may appear more combative/harsh than was my intention, so please don’t take them as a personal attack!

 

[Edric Li]

Firstly, what difference? Did you verify there was an actual audio/sound difference rather than just a difference in your experience/perception? Secondly, why did the difference being “quite large” preclude you from bothering to do any objective measurements or controlled listening tests, do you think that perceptual biases/errors cannot be “quite large” and if so, why?

Because I am neither planning to convince anyone of anything nor trying to write a paper for AES. Just a stranger sharing an experience on an online forum. It ain't that deep. With that said, I care about good sound more than the explanation of it, much like how people before Galileo cared about if the sun's gonna come up tomorrow than if the earth is the center of the universe. I try to explain what I hear for my own benefit, not for the sake of science or to convince you. Sorry. If I were paid for this hobby maybe I'd feel the urge to.

There are any number of “possible explanations”, from a faulty connector to the potential influence of ghosts or aliens. Of course, some possible explanations can be discounted due to scientific evidence/knowledge, at least until the all the probable explanations have been entirely eliminated. Unfortunately you haven’t done that, you’ve skipped over the most probable explanations and jumped on “one possible explanation” that is amongst the very least probable. In fact, you’ve done worse than that, you’ve missed out an entire logical step entirely. You’ve jumped straight into presenting “one possible explanation” for ”the impact on sound” before ascertaining if there even is any “impact on sound” (or the analogue signal).

Perhaps you can start by trying to argue why a faulty connector, ghosts or aliens are a more plausible explanation than cable length?

I have done numerous DA/AD loop tests, on different RCA connectors, different XLR connectors, other different connector types and different cables too, over the course of more than two decades. And, I’ve compared the results of those with a null test and on occasion, a controlled listening test. As you’re obviously aware of an DA/AD loop-back test, why didn’t you use one to ascertain if there was actually an impact on the analogue signal?

I hope my reply implied that I had performed the suggested daisy-chain test, and that I was "surprised" by the difference the difference a single RCA connector made despite the lack of daisy-chaining. Are you suggesting that you've performed this kind of tests and couldn't hear a difference?

 

[gregorio]

Because I am neither planning to convince anyone of anything nor trying to write a paper for AES. Just a stranger sharing an experience on an online forum.

But you didn’t “share an experience”, you made assertions of fact! If you’d said: “I experienced a difference between connectors” that would be sharing an experience but you didn’t, you stated “I could hear the difference between connectors”, “there is a difference but I can't say if one is better than the other”, “The difference between the connectors in this case was quite large”, etc.!

With that said, I care about good sound more than the explanation of it …

If that were true then surely you would have ascertained if there were in fact any impact on the sound/analogue signal?

I try to explain what I hear for my own benefit …

But again, you’re not. You’re posting it publicly so by definition, it’s for others to read not just you and again, you have not ascertained that there even is any impact on the sound, let alone that you can hear it.

Perhaps you can start by trying to argue why a faulty connector, ghosts or aliens are a more plausible explanation than cable length?

Really? Ok: Assuming the correct cable for the task, a few feet of analogue signal cable makes such a minuscule difference to the analogue signal it cannot even be resolved into sound, so obviously cannot be audible and is therefore about as plausible an explanation as ghosts or aliens. On the other hand, a faulty connector can cause parts of the signal or the entire signal to not be transferred, wouldn’t you agree that say no signal vs normal signal is audibly different and that connectors can sometimes be damaged/broken/faulty? So what is more plausible, something that is not only demonstrated to exist but actually does occur quite commonly or ghosts, aliens and audible differences in (short lengths of appropriate) analogue cables which have never been reliably demonstrated to even exist? Isn’t the answer self-evident?

I hope my reply implied that I had performed the suggested daisy-chain test, and that I was "surprised" by the difference the difference a single RCA connector made despite the lack of daisy-chaining.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by a “daisy-chain” test, I thought you were referring to a DA/AD loop-back test? If it’s the latter, what did you do with that digital output?

G

 

[Edric Li]

If you’d said: “I experienced a difference between connectors” that would be sharing an experience but you didn’t, you stated “I could hear the difference between connectors”

Can you paraphrase "I could see the sky is blue" into an experience-sharing version?

If that were true then surely you would have ascertained if there were in fact any impact on the sound/analogue signal?

Hell no. Gordon Ramsay loves good food. You think he cares about chemistry?

But again, you’re not. You’re posting it publicly so by definition, it’s for others to read not just you and again, you have not ascertained that there even is any impact on the sound, let alone that you can hear it.

Aside from the fact that every person, organization or discipline has its own standard of certainty, if I were to say that I've "ascertained" my experience by your standard of procedure, would you believe me? What is your standard of certainty anyways? Have you had any luck enforcing your standard upon strangers online?

Really? Ok: Assuming the correct cable for the task, a few feet of analogue signal cable makes such a minuscule difference to the analogue signal it cannot even be resolved into sound, so obviously cannot be audible and is therefore about as plausible an explanation as ghosts or aliens. On the other hand, a faulty connector can cause parts of the signal or the entire signal to not be transferred, wouldn’t you agree that say no signal vs normal signal is audibly different and that connectors can sometimes be damaged/broken/faulty? So what is more plausible, something that is not only demonstrated to exist but actually does occur quite commonly or ghosts, aliens and audible differences in (short lengths of appropriate) analogue cables which have never been reliably demonstrated to even exist? Isn’t the answer self-evident?

I don't think you know what a faulty connector sounds like.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by a “daisy-chain” test, I thought you were referring to a DA/AD loop-back test? If it’s the latter, what did you do with that digital output?

daisy-chain a bunch of 1/8-1/4 and 1/4-1/8 adapters between your headphone and amplifier

 

[gregorio]

Can you paraphrase "I could see the sky is blue" into an experience-sharing version?

Sure: “The sky appeared to me to be blue but that could have just been some sort of optical illusion or other effect.” - Actually, this is a good example, because the sky is actually not blue, it just appears blue to human eyes!

Hell no. Gordon Ramsay loves good food. You think he cares about chemistry?

Exactly but you’re arguing against yourself! Regardless of how much Gordon Ramsay cares about chemistry, would you expect to go to his restaurant and be served a Big Mac which is maybe experienced differently because it’s presented differently (say on a plate, at a different price, in a restaurant with a different decor) or, would you expect the food itself to actually be different? And, would you not expect Gordon Ramsay to know the actual difference between a McDonalds and a Michelin Starred meal? Again, how is this not self-evident?

Aside from the fact that every person, organization or discipline has its own standard of certainty …

But that is not a fact, it’s actually a falsehood you’ve just made-up! Every person can of course have their own personal opinion of certainty but organisations and disciplines tend to adhere to internationally agreed standards of certainty, that’s why organisations like the ISO exist and more specific to consumer audio, organisations such as the ITU, EBU and ATSC. Science and most of the modern world would not exist if there were no standards of certainty.

if I were to say that I've "ascertained" my experience by your standard of procedure, would you believe me?

This is a strawman argument! I do not have a standard of procedure for ascertaining your experiences and I have NOT stated or even implied that I disbelieve your experiences. I am not disputing that you experienced what you claimed, I’m questioning your assertion that the connectors caused an actual difference (in the analogue signal/sound) that you could actually hear!

What is your standard of certainty anyways?

If someone claims they can hear a difference in the sound, then I expect that there is in fact a difference in the sound and if there is, that they can actually hear it. How is that “my standard of certainty” rather than just obvious logic/common sense and why is this apparently so difficult to understand? If someone claims that unicorns exist or some audiophile marketing claims some magical property, do you just believe them or do you expect some reliable supporting evidence? If it’s the former, how would science (and our technological world that’s dependent on it) have ever existed?

Have you had any luck enforcing your standard upon strangers online?

It’s not “my standard” and many “strangers online” are capable of obvious logic/common sense without any enforcement from me.

I don't think you know what a faulty connector sounds like.

Why?

I’m not quite sure what you mean by a “daisy-chain” test, I thought you were referring to a DA/AD loop-back test? - “daisy-chain a bunch of 1/8-1/4 and 1/4-1/8 adapters between your headphone and amplifier.”

Err, just repeating the cause of confusion does not address the issue that it is confusing. You stated “try to apply the idea of the DA/AD-loop test” but your description of that test (which you’ve repeated) is just a chain of analogue connections ending with an analogue to acoustic conversion. No mention of a DA conversion, no AD conversion and no apparent “loop”, so how is your description a “DA/AD loop test”?

G

 

[Edric Li]

Sure: “The sky appeared to me to be blue but that could have just been some sort of optical illusion or other effect.” - Actually, this is a good example, because the sky is actually not blue, it just appears blue to human eyes!

Thanks G. I will never say the sky is blue ever again in my life. I was immature and now I am enlightened and humbled.

 

[gregorio]

Thanks G. I will never say the sky is blue ever again in my life. I was immature and now I am enlightened and humbled.

You’re welcome! It is of course entirely up to you what you say “ever again in your life” and whether you feel immature, enlightened or humbled but for those who do not want to mislead others, appear ignorant in general and especially in a science discussion forum, it’s wise to ascertain the actual facts BEFORE making factual assertions based on nothing but personal perceptions and ignorance.

G

 

[KinGensai]

@Edric Li
The difference gregorio is trying to explain between hearing and perceiving something is the actual event vs your experience of it. The difference is significant if the issue is determining repeatability of the event, although this is probably getting a bit too much in the weeds.

@gregorio
I get that cable length increases capacitance and affects the audio signal as the cable gets longer (say a 10' guitar cable vs a 100' cable), is that possible with a connector like the ones Edric is mentioning?