Serious ? about mic cabling

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:31 pm

If you like, come up to Alpine Zilla. I got stout and silver solder. We make that cable mo' gooooood.

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:05 pm

OK, but I hear it takes quite a bit of stout to make the silver flow.
I'll bring my Sound Devices 302 and see if it passes. I gotta go to Arnie's house tonight... "Lions for Lambs." I'll give you a call this weekend.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 2:17 am

I'm Jewish so I use whatever is on sale.

As long as the cable is not microfonic, it's microfine!

Good enough for government work and rock-and-roll
Ms. Remy Ann David

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 5:41 am

RemyRAD wrote:

I'm Jewish so I use whatever is on sale.

As long as the cable is not microfonic, it's microfine!

Good enough for government work and rock-and-roll
Ms. Remy Ann David

Oh yeah!

Well, I'm Italian, so I use what ever the store has behind its easily broken display window after hours. Evil or Very Mad

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:55 am

I like ProCo cables.

I have had good luck with them and they have been in some not to nice situations outdoors in the rain and mud and run over repeatedly indoors by a large cart that they were using to take chairs to the stage. No problems with them at all.

I did buy some ProCo cables that were "crimped" and after about a month they started to become very intermittent so I worked out a deal with the store where I bought them in and had them replaced with soldered connectors. It cost me an additional $250 but it was worth it. No more crimped connectors for me.......

If I have to build my own I use CANARE wire and Neutrik Connectors and I still use 60/40 solder.

In the old days I used Belden 8412 but the rubber jacket always started breaking down and shedding rubber.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:17 am

I thought it was Belden 8413, or was the 13 the minature cable?
Good stuff. Come to think of it, I've been using the same solder roll for a few too many years.

Now, I'm going to still ask a ?
Anyone notice any sonic differences between silver plated cable and OFC copper cable?

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:04 am

BRH wrote:

Now, I'm going to still ask a ?
Anyone notice any sonic differences between silver plated cable and OFC copper cable?

For what it's worth, some audiophile friends of mine maintain that "silver is sibilant" when used for speaker cables. But they're audiophiles. And they're using it for speakers, not microphones...

Silver has the best conductivity of all metals, so I would assume it is the best choice for a cable, all other factors being equal (cable length, number of strands per conductor, diameter of strands, cable geometry, choice of dielectric/insulation, etc.). Under those circumstances, silver *ought* to have the performance advantage.

But if you decide instead to make and/or compare a silver cable and copper cable at the same price point, it's probably possible to use more strands and/or larger diameter strands of copper, so it can equal or perhaps outperform the silver.

And now, I'd like to throw my two Malaysian Ringits worth at your original question...

My main cables are Klotz, Mogami and Canare.

The Klotz, from Germany, is excellent value for money. It is very easy to work with (preparing, soldering, etc.) and can take a fair bit of abuse. In fact, the school I teach at has standardised all the mic and guitar leads throughout their studios on Klotz balanced mic lead and multicores with standard Neutrik XLRs and Neutrik/Ningbo jacks. Most of their lead problems have gone away. That's pretty good considering the treatment those cables get - especially from new students who don't know how to respect a microphone lead, or wind one properly.

My personal preference is for Mogami, but I mainly use their two- and four-channel multicore stuff. It's works well, and is wonderfully compliant so that it lays flat and stays where you run it. To me, that's an important issue. Considering that most well-designed cables are going to perform properly and handle your signal with respect, other criteria may as well become important. Ease of use in the field makes a big difference to the satisfaction of doing the job.

The only Canare I use is their star quad, but I try to avoid it whenever possible - I find it too stiff to work with (after using the Mogami, that is), I *hate* soldering it, and I don't like the potential loss of top end. Whether it's audible or not is not the issue to me; the problem is that if I think there *might* be a loss due to the selection of cable, then I'm getting worried about it the moment anything sounds dull. Is it the cable, the mic, or what? There are enough things in audio to get neurotic about as it is, I don't need to be introducing any more variables! Sometimes star quad is the only solution, but I'm rarely in such electrically hostile environments. Having said that, I empathise with Ben's comment that he'll take the quality hit if it means less interference.

As for connectors, for me it's Neutrik, Neutrik, Neutrik and Neutrik. If I really can't get Neutrik, and ONLY if I really can't get Neutrik, then I'll use Neutrik instead. Whether XLRs, jacks, RCAs or whatever, there's a Neutrik (or Ningbo, their cheaper Chinese-made alternative) to do the job.

I have seen the results of RF tests done on XLRs that showed the best rejection of all came from the longer bodied Switchcrafts. (In all of those tests, pin 1 was connected to the XLR shell, thereby extending the shield over the connector and into the chassis of the input device.) So, if I was making microphone cables specifically for an electrically hostile environment, I'd be using star quad and the longer bodied Switchcrafts without a doubt (and soldering the shell to pin one). Other than that, I never use Switchcraft because they are so damned expensive in Australia compared to Neutrik - especially the gold-plated versions. Crikeys, I could raise a child in a third world country for the cost of a pair of black/gold Switchcrafts in Australia.

As for differing metals on the contacts:

1) Gold does not tarnish or oxidise, which is a positive. However, its conductivity is not as good as copper, IIRC.

2) Silver has the highest conductivity, 5% or 6% higher than copper, but it tarnishes - as does copper. However, I recall learning many moons ago that silver oxide is more conductive than silver itself, while copper oxide is less conductive than copper. (Um, I can't back that statement up at the moment; anyone care to scientifically refute it?) In other words, the tarnishing of silver should not be a problem in theory - silver improves with age, while copper degrades. Silver is certainly more conductive than gold, and if it is true that silver oxide is more conductive than silver then the choice is a no-brainer.

3) When using dissimilar metals (e.g. silver male XLR into gold female XLR), it is possible to create a rectifying junction, and this can cause distortion at microphone levels. I overcame these problems a long time ago by using a liquid called Stabilant 22. I use it on everything now (er, not for toothpaste or cocktails... I mean, I use it for all of my critical audio and electrical connections), and can vouch for it. I'm convinced it is serious stuff, not some audiophile gimmick. It has a NATO rating, and is recommended for the electricals of some European car manufacturers (in fact, the Australian importer for Stabilant 22 is an auto-electrical supplier, not an audio company). It is a fascinating liquid - you can learn about it here:

http://www.stabilant.com/

Before pooh-poohing it as some audiophile wank, please read about the liquid itself and some of their application notes. Very interesting.

Also note that a third party was selling the product into the audio market under the name Sumiko or Tweak or similar, at exhorbitant prices. When the Stabilant manufacturers found out, they put an end to it. Says something about their credibility...

I use it on my XLRs and on the edge connectors within my audio gear - the inside of my Nagra V is practically swimming in the stuff (kidding, but it's on the edge connectors and the removable hard disk contacts). I cannot categorically state that it has solved any problems, but my gear continues to work flawlessly day in, day out. That's no mean feat considering where it goes and how it gets there. I am sure the Stabilant has something to do with it. [The hot, humid and sticky rainforest of Borneo yesterday, recording the sape (pronounced 'sar-pay') in the middle of a jungle trail, complete with birds, buzzing insects, light rain, and crawling undergrowth...]

As for solder, I always use WBT silver content. But I'm pedantic, and I also believe that if I'm going to the bother of making a lead, I'm going to make a damn good lead, and therefore I don't mind spending a little extra time or money to get it right. If made well and subsequently looked after, a lead ought to last a VERY LONG TIME - after all, it's metal and plastic. It's not going to decay or anything, is it?

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:05 pm

Simmosonic, thank you for that detailed info.

Well, I bought some Kester silver solder and put the 20year old roll of 6040 away. And started on making a couple of Canare StarQuad leads. Acutally, I only made 2 ...... damn braid and all.

I never have connected pin 1 to case, but I'm starting to rethink this issue. And it seems appropriate in high/unknown RF and electromagnetic areas to do this. Some of the store bought cables have case to pin 1 solder already.
I asked our Production Audio instructor about this, with many more years working as a pro, and his response was "If it works, don't mess with it."

Ok, I'm wonder about the cable that went out on my. Homemade Mogami 2 conductor. I put an extra heat shrink tube on the end by the Neutrik to act as extra strain relief. I'm wondering if the cable can twist inside of this extra shrink tube, even though it's tightened down by the Neutrik., and break a lead. Thinking too hard?

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:19 pm

BRH wrote:

I never have connected pin 1 to case, but I'm starting to rethink this issue. And it seems appropriate in high/unknown RF and electromagnetic areas to do this.

When a cable is connected to a mic output or preamp input, the Shell will be connected to the Chassis, thereby extending the chassis shielding to the shell. Connecting 1 to shell effectivly connects signal ground to earth/chassis ground, which may cause injection (rather than rejection) of RF.

I would only connect the xlr shell to pin 1 when daisy-chaining mic cables (like when you add a cable for more length). And only connect on the female xlr's.

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:25 pm

I don't recommend nor do I ever connect pin 1 to the shell. I had too many problems with that over the years in the past. Plus, you then have exposed chassis grounds all over your stage or studio. In a properly balanced configuration, you really don't need the shell grounded. But then, some people don't even practice safe sex.

I love aural sex
Ms. Remy Ann David

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:08 pm

LOL
No wonder I've never done anything with pin 1 in the past...... it ain't safe!
Nothing like a big antenna hanging out in the breeze!

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:38 pm

BRH wrote:

I never have connected pin 1 to case, but I'm starting to rethink this issue. And it seems appropriate in high/unknown RF and electromagnetic areas to do this.

Following on from Zilla and Remy; when connecting pin 1 to the XLR shell you are entering an *interesting* world that can introduce as many problems as it solves. I mentioned it as an off-the-cuff generalisation in relation to the RF testing, and should've thought it through and put it into the correct context.

Zilla and Remy's concerns about 1) the injection of interference from the XLR shell into the signal; 2) of connecting the cable shield to the XLR shell at one end only when daisy-chaining microphone cables (presumably to prevent grounding problems); and 3) exposing the chassis grounds all over the stage or studio, are all highly relevant and important.

Sadly, the balanced system wasn't meant to be that way...

All of these problems stem from the fact that few people or manufacturers use the balanced system as it was originally intended. This was thrashed out some years ago on the highly respected Syn-Aud-Con newsgroup by the likes of Neil Muncy and others (real experts when it comes to noise, shielding and earthing), and became known as 'The Pin 1 Problem'. A quick Google search on 'pin one problem' turned up the following:

http://www.rane.com/note151.html

http://www.audiovisualdevices.com.au/downloads/rane/note102.pdf

http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0071/t.1589.html

But I'm sure you'll find more if you're interested. I have all the Syn-Aud-Con information about it in their newsletters and forum archives, which are stored somewhere in a large locker in Sydney (along with the rest of my increasingly redundant Western 'life'). But at the moment I'm under a different shield: sheltering from a fantastically heavy electrical storm in Sarawak, Borneo! Nothing better to do than sit here on the internet and hope the power holds out...

I will attempt to explain the The Pin 1 Problem from memory:

The original balanced connection was intended to have four connections: signal +ve, signal -ve, signal 0V, and shield. The original balanced cable has a shield and *three* internal conductors - Belden still make some cables that way, e.g. 8403, 8406 and 8423...

...and, of course, all XLRs still have the fourth solder connection to the shell. The idea was that the shield remained fully isolated from the audio at all times, so it was purely a shield around the audio system, draining induced interference currents to mains earth while keeping them away from signal 0V.

This was a brilliant idea, because it enveloped the *entire* audio system in a shield that had no electrical connection to the audio whatsoever - the cable's shield connected to the XLR's shell, which in turn connected to the device's metal chassis. When done properly, the shield therefore extended throughout the entire audio system, from microphone housing to power amplifier, but never had any electrical contact with the audio circuitry. Zilla's concern about injecting noise, and Remy's concern about exposing chassis grounds all over the stage or studio, would not be issues...

But many manufacturers misunderstood it (or simply got lazy), and started connecting XLR pin 1 (signal 0V) to mains earth via a chassis connection (sometimes via the panel-mounted XLR in/out connections), opening up the possibility for earth loops, interference injection and so on because the audio reference (signal 0V) is now connected to the interference dumping ground (mains earth!). Any interference captured by the cable's shield and/or the shell of the XLR ends up in the signal 0V and, ultimately, manifests in the signal itself.

Bummer.

Some manufacturers, like Rane, responded to this by ensuring that signal 0V (XLR pin 1) remains electrically isolated from the mains earth in all of their products. Some end-users who were members of Syn-Aud-Con also re-wired all of their equipment (predominantly PA systems) to overcome the pin 1 problem, getting their technicians to find ways to safely separate the signal 0V from mains earth inside their equipment. Some even went as far as using the Belden cable mentioned above, and wiring their entire systems correctly. Whenever a new item of audio is purchased, it is tested for the pin 1 problem and, if necessary, the appropriate modifications are made before integrating it into their system.

One of the Syn-Aud-Con newsletters includes details of how to construct a 'hummer' (er, not a car driven by Arnie), a simple piece of test equipment that quickly shows if a piece of gear has 'The Pin 1 Problem'.

That's all I can remember for now...

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:55 pm

Im the guy who likes to spend the extra cash on lifetime warranty cables just so I can take them back and get new ones whenever I feel like it...

They dont even have to be broken, I like the new smell....

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:29 am

Of course, the only thing that can ever go wrong with the cable would be an unsoldered connection (which can easily be fixed without sending cables back) or a cable break/compromise which really can't be easily fixed.

I don't know that sending cables back that aren't broken is cool. I offer a lifetime warranty on my cables, but if I start getting cables back that test out fine from the same client over and over, I'd stop honoring your warranty. It costs me a lot of money to give out free cables. I don't recycle connectors or cables for new cable sales...it costs and drives up the price of my cables when it happens.

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:36 am

A lifetime warranty is no use to me, because I want cables that don't break down in the first place and therefore won't need a warranty!

I gave up sniffing cables a long time ago, so I'm not even interested in 'new smell' any more. Wink

Of all the microphone cable problems I can remember having, none have been with cables that I have made myself from good quality components. They have invariably been when I've had to borrow a bunch of ready-mades from someone else's collection. And when one of those doesn't work, the 'someone else' says, "Never mind, it's got a lifetime warranty, I'll get a new one next week". That's all well and good, but the priorities are arse-about: who cares about next week? I've just been messed around on the job, I've lost time isolating the problem (microphone, cable or preamp?), I've got one less microphone cable than I started with, and the show must go on.

Bugger...

This topic sponsored by: