CK- Belligerent? I merely stated a fact. Of course I acknowledge that everything produced(whether audio or video software) is processed via balanced circuitry. Every live(reinforced) music venue, recording, engineering, or production facility that I've worked has contained a plethora of power transformers, signal cables, power cords, etc, each a potential RFI/EMI(and now digital interference) generator. The whole concept of balanced circuitry was to combat the induced hum and noise that these sources can and will produce. I've yet to encounter a home environment that is that hostile to an audio signal(with even minimal care toward proper interconnect/cable/cord routing). How many home audio pre-amps are manufactured with fully differential circuitry? All but the best that are marketed today with "balanced" ins and outs will convert a balanced input to an unbalanced signal for the pre's gain stages, then back to balanced via active circuits(transistors or ICs). Most power amps with "Balanced" inputs are not fully differential either, which means yet another conversion(and more degradation) for the signal. With all that signal manipulation and additional electronics in the signal path, one cannot assume that a piece of home audio gear will inherently perform better in a "balanced" configuration than "unbalanced". You mentioned the processing and signal manipulation that is so rampant in the industry today(I'd only add "compression" to your list), and I agree completely. It's something we do have to live with though. The cable thing: Hopefully our recorded material was minimally processed and by producers/engineers that did as little damage to the signal as possible. Corrections and EQ's are unavoidable though, and all performed before the stamping process. I've found that the amount correction/EQ necessary depends largely on the quality of the mics and cables in use. Using the same mics: Audioquests in the studio DO make a difference too. From the outs of my BAT VK-D5 to the ins of my TacT RCS 2.2X(both fully differential), I've got a 1m pair of balanced interconnects. My first were Kimber Silver Streaks, then KCAGs and now KS-1130s. Each step yielded better tonal balance, focus, and a wider/deeper sound stage(none were slouches). If a change in a 1m pair of interconnects can provide an improvement in presentation, I have to assert that not going "cheap" on a 5m pair of cables would be a wise decision. YES- Two track: I'll take a pair of B&K 4133's and a Studer A-30 running at 30IPS please! My favorite recordings have always been direct-to-discs. For CDs- AAD made from 2 track masters like the Sheffield Labs(recorded during D-T-D takes) or Dead Can Dance material.
Which is better longer xlr or speaker cable
I have just purchased my first mono amps (Nuforce Reference 9V2SE's) giving me some new cable options. Currently I run a one meter pair of XLR and then four 5 meter pairs, as I biwire, of speaker cable. With the mono's now I can also do a 5 meter xlr and short speaker cables.
Which should produce better sound. And for equal sound quality, which should be less expensive. Any recommendations for a reasonable cost way to do this? I would like to get in new or used for under $500 for whatever additional stuff I have to buy. In option one I will need new speaker cable, in option two, new IC xlr. Is it OK to have different lengths of cable, probably 3 meters to the closer speaker?
Thanks
Which should produce better sound. And for equal sound quality, which should be less expensive. Any recommendations for a reasonable cost way to do this? I would like to get in new or used for under $500 for whatever additional stuff I have to buy. In option one I will need new speaker cable, in option two, new IC xlr. Is it OK to have different lengths of cable, probably 3 meters to the closer speaker?
Thanks
- ...
- 32 posts total
- 32 posts total