Serious ? about mic cabling

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:58 pm

OK... this is serious now. Any of you classical recording pros want to fess up and tell me what brand and type mic cables you are running, and why?
Quad or regular? Silver, copper? Minature?
What are you running for line level?
Soldered or solderless connectors?
What kind of solder?
Anyone experience handling noise that goes right up into the mic?

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:26 pm

Yo Homie!

What kind of noise are you getting? Like, RF, Hum, Hash, or Cable Microphonics? What be ailing you mahn? How the cable is constructed and its current state of repair has more to do with noise rejection, not so much cable quality.

I use an assortment of cables depending on the situation and # of channels needed. Most of the live archival situations will have Mogami on the scene with Neutrik connectors. Mainly because of cost and road-worthiness. For "audiophile" sessions with light channel counts I go with fancy expensive video cable. All are constructed with silver-bearing solder connections.

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:41 pm

I use Neutrik XLR and 1/4" - they're easy to fix in a pinch, no screwdriver necessary...

Mogami for dynamics and FX patch snakes.

Whirlwind stage boxes, splitters, and snakes - for on stage cabling.

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:01 pm

Howdy!

Well, I was doing a 'run and gun' job for the golf channel at a country club, and my homemade mogami 2 conductor started to crap out. I switched to store bought PSC Canare quad backup... 5 ft. length for $25..... and it was fixed.
On the boom pole I have a minature short from mic, connected to cable on boom pole, connected with another cable from boompole to mixer. All this seems to help eliminate handling noise. Clothe covered cable seems to be good with the handling noise, and/or internal clothe in the cable.
I read somewhere not to use the gold Neutriks, just the silver ones. But I'm gold.
I need a better solder. I'm using this stuff that's been lying around for a couple of years. I like the Mogami 2 conductor because it's easier to deal with.
What's the video cable for audio deal? I need highly flexible and reliable short runs. Some situations I'm right next to 500amps running on the floor from a generator.

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:16 am

As much as I love working with Mogami, it really doesn't do well around bad electrical fields. Because of that I've gone with Canare Star Quad in the field for much of what I do. I've just had too many times when a cable run next to an extension cord screws me...

I'll take the sonic hit to not have to deal with any of that.

--Ben

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 2:55 am

I am reliably informed that this is the bees knees for sonics.
http://www.vandenhul.com/p_B89.aspx

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:24 am

DavidSpearritt wrote:

I am reliably informed that this is the bees knees for sonics.
http://www.vandenhul.com/p_B89.aspx

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:37 am

For what it's worth, I've experimented a LOT with various cables since I have about 15 rolls of it here and have my choice to play with.

Mogami 2 lead with copper strand shield -
Ease of assembly = Easy *

Rejection of RF/EMI noise = minimal. If there's a strong RF field, you will know it.

Rejection of handling noise = acceptable. If anyone steps on it, you'll hear a crackle in the recording.

Notes:
One of the easiest cables to assemble and sounds nice if in a good location. My favorite "cheap" down and dirty cable.

Mogami Neglex Quad -
Ease of assembly = Moderately easy (due mostly to it's loose copper shield)

Rejection of RF/EMI noise = acceptable. In most situations, this cable will block out just about any stray electrical borne noise.

Rejection of handling noise = acceptable. A tad better than the standard, but will still make noticable noises if heavily handled or stepped on by a larger person.

Notes:
Given the slight bit more complication in assembly plus the fact that it's only marginally better than the traditional Mogami, I rarely opt for this cable and rarely sell it. If one wants a quad cable, I usually go to Canare or Belden.

Canare Star Quad
Ease of Assembly - Moderatly difficult. The tightly wound tinned shield can be a pain in the butt to unravel enough to solder. A dental pick is my weapon of choice in doing so. Invariably, I lose several strands in the process

Rejection of RF/EMI noise - Excellent*

Rejection of Handling noise - Very Good.

Notes - The smooth jacket and variable colors make this my most popular cable for sure. The cable is robust and perfectly sized and weighted.

Canare 2 cable w/ braid
Ease of assembly - Moderate. Still a tightly wound shield, but less leads to solder together.

Rejection of RF/EMI noise - Very Good

Rejection of Handling noise - Good

Notes - This is my best selling "entry level" cable.

Belden Quad
Ease of assembly - Moderately difficult. Similar shielding to Canare quad.

Rejection of RF/EMI noise - Very Good/Excellent

Rejection of Handling Noise - Excellent *

Notes - the texture to the jacket makes it more "grippable" than the Canare and the many colors available make it quite popular. I think (assumption only) that the texture on the jacket helps to minimize handling noise as this cable exhibits almost no handling noise at all.

All that being said, the cables I use on location are:

Snakes -
8 Channel Monster Cable 500 Series snake
16+4 Channel ProCo Snake
8 Channel Belden (non-quad) snake

Leads -
Mogami Neglex Quad
Canare Star Quad
Whirlwind
Monster 500 Series
Mogami 2-channel snakes

Sorry for information overload...

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:16 am

Thats a great list, thanks for that!

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:48 am

I second the thank you for that list.
Pretty much spelled out my thoughts, except I think I needed some pro validation. I wondering if it wasn't some kind of interference ... I was using 2 lead Mogami, had just move to a location where there was a wireless sound system. I can't find anything wrong with the cable, afterward...post test.

Yes, Vandenhul, but.....$ and I need flexible. Can somone here say what the sonic difference is using silver vs. copper? If any!

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:56 pm

Oh...I forgot one thing.

I use WBT silver for fine detail soldering and Kester Silver (large diameter) for XLR soldering. Both of these melt and flow at a similar temperature making the iron need to be in the same spot much less time than with other (plumbing grade, etc.) solders. Sadly, neither of these are cheap.

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:19 pm

BRH wrote:

Can somone here say what the sonic difference is using silver vs. copper? If any!

Silver connectors are better but need more attention as it tarnishes regularly. Also, both connectors should be the same material: gold-gold or silver-silver, not gold-silver.

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:43 pm

So, are you saying if you have a male silver XLR on a cable and you are plugging into a pre that is gold XLRF, you are better off using a gold on that end of the cable?

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:53 pm

Right. Matching materials seems to make for a better connection chemically. Also, matching manufacturers products will generally mate better mechanically (neutrik to neutrik, switchcraft to switchcraft).

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:15 pm

Thanks Homie. That's what I wanted to hear. I gotta go back and do a little bit of rethink... take a better look at what I'm hookin' up with.

This topic sponsored by: