Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
I use whichever cable that my hand grabs in my big bag 'o' cables.
muttley600
Banned
.......
I don't buy into a lot of the cable hype either (all I care is they don't get twisted up on me!), but a guitar isn't an exercise in electrical engineering purity, it's a real-world musical instrument, and I care way more how it stacks up against the later than the former.
You are entirely correct. Once you have invested enough to get you past the real shitty cables you are going to get zero return on any extra invested. The only time it becomes mildly releavant is on very long cable runs. People get sucked into this cable thing and it's bollocks. I just haven't got the desire or energy to go through the physics or the practicalities of it.
Just buy or make a decent cable and rock out. Trying to listen for an improvement in tone as a result of buying a snake oil cable is pointless.
mshilarious
Banned
It's even worse mutts! Some of them are actively making electrically inferior cable specifically so they will sound different! And charging more money for it! Arrrrgh!
I mean if it were a $20 cable and they disclosed what they had done and its real effect on tone, OK then, it would just be like an effects box or something . . .
famous beagle
Well-known member
mshilarious, you know way more about the physics of this than I do, so I'm not going to question your far superiour grasp on that.
That said, I disagree with you on this, and I think it's because your knowledge is getting in the way of your objectivity, if that makes any sense. A cable that affects your signal the least possible is maybe a theoretically better cable, in that it does what we expect a cable to do with the least interference, yes.
However, look at the rest of your guitar rig - pickups that don't really provide full frequency input and drop off between 5hz and 8hz or so, depending on model, amplifiers that are designed to clip on both the input and output stage, "tone" controls that cut out certain parts of the signal, and speakers that are nowhere close to full frequency. You've also talked at length about inefficiencies in the ways guitars are wired that cause further problems. Obviously, nowhere else in the signal chain are you really after a component that colors the tone the least - why should a cable be any different? Amps that intentionally distort at low volumes, or pickups that are mostly concentrated below 6khz are all easily more "inefficient" than a lot of guitar cables.
The way I see it, guitarists have been using, and growing up listening to, the sound of very inefficient, non-full-frequency gear for generations now. It's part of the sound of the electric guitar, and that sound is why we all play today. I think it's important to pay attention to the science behind gear too and it can be very useful in debunking bloated marketing claims, but the ultimate question is, "Yes, but how does it SOUND?" If in a double blind test I think a less-efficient cable sounds better in my rig than a more efficient one, then I'm obviously not going to care at all about the science, since the real-world tone is working for me, right?
I don't buy into a lot of the cable hype either (all I care is they don't get twisted up on me!
I agree with you here, Drew. Who says that the definition of a good cable is "one that affects the signal the least possible."
We've already seen evidence with the early Fender amps that, even when something is designed to provide the cleanest, clearest signal possible (as the early Fender amps were), beautiful things can happen when they are used in ways other than foreseen (i.e., diming them out so they get as fuzzy as a bear).
If a cable's working for you and does what you need/want, then who needs physics?
I've heard (and I don't know for sure) that the spiraled cables used by Hendrix, Clapton, and others in the 60s were, by today's standards, pretty bad cables, but, if I recall, they were certainly able to coax some decent sounds out of them.
)
M1Fanatic
Digital whaaa?
Not aimed at you or your post at all but just a stepping off point. ..switching to 'jaded mode (which seems to grow stronger lately..
It seems to me you can find a whole lot of examples in this game, audio, recording, where one as opposed to 'looking for pure accuracy/fidelity', there is no 'true tone' at all. We are rather mixing and matching pieces and sounds, reacting and adjusting, to create –whatever.
From that context I'll ask, what if it (this cable, a mic, the possible examples are endless) -didn't sound the same?
Let's say we step into some (any) given situation, plug in our favorite guitar and amp, mic, whatever. What is the first thing that happens? We adjust, in any number of ways.
Huge variables at play. Move the mic an inch or so, all that.
Hell, I'd be curious, has anyone ever played the same gig, same club', three or four nights in a row and ever have your rig, the stage' sound the same to you each night? I have not.
I would propose that even the human chemistry/perception variable alone swamps many of these 'differences.
Remember, this coming from the context where there is no 'this is the 'real' or this is the true' tone –is where we operate most of the time!
..Third night in, hmm sounds a little scooped', better back the mid back up a bit'.
See where I'm coming from here?
Absolutely. I can play several days in a row and not have the rig sound the same way twice to my ears. Depends upon my mood, setting, am I hungry, do I need another cup of coffee, even the time of day for me. Yesterday morning sounded awesome. Last night sounded like ass so I put it down after 40 minutes. This morning it sounds great again.
Just depends.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
I'm more or less with you here. I don't think it's really about the laws of physics, though - you've got a tremendous amount of knowledge in this stuff, man, and I respect that, but at the end of the day it's what works for your ears. If a physically-inferior cable really and truly sounds better than a theoretically more "correct" one, then regardless of the physics doesn't it make sense to go with the "inferior" cable that sounds better?
I do agree that ultimately what you and I need to do is find the cheapest way to get a sound we;re happy with, and some knowledge of how a cable works may help there, to debunk some of the crazier claims some cable makers will use, but at the end of the day, you can't really put together a killer rig just looking at spec sheets - you need to play.
mshilarious
Banned
Well it's impossible to play every combination of everything, isn't it? Unless you don't value your time or your money. So we should take a cut out by rejecting stuff we know doesn't make sense.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
Well, it IS a question of diminishing returns, but unless (and this is all I've been trying to say all along) there's some concrete, logical, and empirically provable reason that using a perfectly efficient cable as part of a rig where every other aspect is intentionally inefficient makes just as much sense as shopping for the best sounding guitar based solely on whether it's the color red. I mean, people do it, it's cool, but it's an arbitrary choice, when you get right down to it.
Zaphod B
Raccoons-Be-Gone, Inc.
Sure, it all comes down to personal preference.
But it's disingenious of Monster and the other boutique cable makers to claim "better" tone when they may actually be making cable that has a filtering effect on your guitar's tone, and charging extra money, and preying on the "more expensive must be better" mentality.
Now, if you make an informed decision to spend $60 on an Allesandro 20' cable, knowing that it's going to roll the top end off your ice-picky Telecaster, so be it. (But like MSH says, why not just add capacitance to your cheap cable - or use the tone control on your guitar?)
But it's disingenious of Monster and the other boutique cable makers to claim "better" tone when they may actually be making cable that has a filtering effect on your guitar's tone, and charging extra money, and preying on the "more expensive must be better" mentality.
Now, if you make an informed decision to spend $60 on an Allesandro 20' cable, knowing that it's going to roll the top end off your ice-picky Telecaster, so be it. (But like MSH says, why not just add capacitance to your cheap cable - or use the tone control on your guitar?)
mshilarious
Banned
The tone control works a bit differently; same principle different execution. The capacitance is much higher, but it's a high-shelf cut by virtue of the pot's resistance. So you won't really get the peaking behavior from the resonance unless it's full off, and then only if the volume knob is also down, and the frequency will be much lower.
You also have to understand cable effects as a function of length. Let's say you found that Monster cable groovy. OK, you now know you want a 1.4nF load on your guitar for that groovacious tone. But it's only a 12' cable, so that's fine in your studio but you need a 30' cable for live. So now you need a 50pF/ft cable to get the same load as your Monster shorty. Beware if you buy a 30' Monster though, that would be a much heavier and therefore possibly bad-sounding load.
Whereas if you have low-capacitance cable of any length, you can always stick the required cap in the cable to arrive at the desired net load.
Not that anybody's going to do any of that, but just for illustration . . .
BTW, everybody uses specs. What gauge are your strings? Your pickups, are they single coil or humbuckers, hot or not? Your amp, tube or solid state? The output, is it single-ended or push-pull? Speakers are 12"? 10"? 15"? 8"?
See, you know all of that stuff right off, and you also know what you prefer. 'tis no different.
Even if you never use hard numerical specs, it should be comforting to know they are there, because it means somebody cared. Take Eminence, for example. How many different guitar speakers do they stock? Thirty or so, I think. They all have subjective tonal descriptions, which is what most guitarists will read . . . but they also all have complete specs, including frequency response and impedance curves and Thiele-Small parameters. So I'm glad they care
You also have to understand cable effects as a function of length. Let's say you found that Monster cable groovy. OK, you now know you want a 1.4nF load on your guitar for that groovacious tone. But it's only a 12' cable, so that's fine in your studio but you need a 30' cable for live. So now you need a 50pF/ft cable to get the same load as your Monster shorty. Beware if you buy a 30' Monster though, that would be a much heavier and therefore possibly bad-sounding load.
Whereas if you have low-capacitance cable of any length, you can always stick the required cap in the cable to arrive at the desired net load.
Not that anybody's going to do any of that, but just for illustration . . .
BTW, everybody uses specs. What gauge are your strings? Your pickups, are they single coil or humbuckers, hot or not? Your amp, tube or solid state? The output, is it single-ended or push-pull? Speakers are 12"? 10"? 15"? 8"?
See, you know all of that stuff right off, and you also know what you prefer. 'tis no different.
Even if you never use hard numerical specs, it should be comforting to know they are there, because it means somebody cared. Take Eminence, for example. How many different guitar speakers do they stock? Thirty or so, I think. They all have subjective tonal descriptions, which is what most guitarists will read . . . but they also all have complete specs, including frequency response and impedance curves and Thiele-Small parameters. So I'm glad they care
Zaphod B
Raccoons-Be-Gone, Inc.
Celestion does, as well.Take Eminence, for example. How many different guitar speakers do they stock? Thirty or so, I think. They all have subjective tonal descriptions, which is what most guitarists will read . . . but they also all have complete specs, including frequency response and impedance curves and Thiele-Small parameters. So I'm glad they care
gecko zzed
Grumpy Mod
I'm with the lieutenant on this one. I grab whichever cable is handiest. When I buy, I look for the cheapest that looks strong enough.
To me, the argument falls into the same category as those supporting sampling rates of 96 or 192 over 44. There may be differences . . . but who cares? The differences (if they exist) are so marginal that they are overwhelmed by other quality factors in the playing or recording signal path.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
^^^^this^^^^
I don't deny that different cables sound different.
Hell, I'm an audiophile and you know how much debating there is in that community over patch cables.
But ultimately the sonic differences for guitar use aren't so huge that I'm gonna obsess over it. If my top end rolls off a bit it'll be a night where about the third song I reach over and tweak my tone controls.
G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
My cables definitely color my tone. Last night it was chartreuse, but tonight I'm more in the mood for aquamarine. 
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
...and THIS makes perfect sense to me. Identify what works, learn the specs, and then learn how to mimic that with different lengths.