Analysis Cables

[Paul Marossy]

And while I do understand arguments for lower noise, and yes it's always best to lower noise at the beginning of the chain as much as you can, come on... We're talking loud electric guitars in environments like sweaty bars here, not brain surgery or some audiophool's listening room.

+1

[Mark Hammer]

+2, but.......

The cable is but one player in the complex equation that creates one's tone.  The entire signal path, including cable, volume pots on the guitar and their respective loading, on-board tone circuits and their alterations to the resonance, the presence or absence of buffering along the way to the amp, and so on, all form part of the overall "distributed circuit" that one's rig comprises.

I can understand how a person would desire the most "objective" cable they could find such that they could safely think "Okay, I don't have to factor THAT into my overall tone if I change anything else".

And that's part of the debate for me.  Yes, it is only rock and roll guitar, and yes a great deal of what might be in the signal is simply lost on ears that won't hear true at high volumes, or that have too much beer between them to care, BUT the player wants to know that if they change A they don't have to change B because B is "transparent" with respect to the rest of the signal path.  To my mind that is a legitimate consideration.  Not one to be pursued from the pages of The Absolute Sound to beyond the bounds of reasonableness, but at least "legitimate". 

Where opinions seem to diverge is where exactly the point of diminishing returns is.  Even amongst the most gonzo audiophiles (well, at least until you get out past 2 standard deviations from the mean), there is a point where someone would say, too expensive or time-consuming or cumbersome for what it delivers.

[DougH]

BUT the player wants to know that if they change A they don't have to change B because B is "transparent" with respect to the rest of the signal path.  To my mind that is a legitimate consideration.

I agree to some extent. And if cable capacitance caused all kinds of wild, unpredictable behavior and complex interactions, oscillations, etc I would agree much more strongly. However, IME, the worst that cable capacitance has affected me after plugging in that unbuffered pedalboard, or plugging in that 20 footer for the first time, is a very slight treble rolloff- maybe- if I do happen to notice it, which sometimes I don't. Rectifying the problem is simple, and it is objective enough for my mind (and ears).

Where opinions seem to diverge is where exactly the point of diminishing returns is.

Sure. And I haven't heard any cable "issues" yet that were IMO worth spending more than $25 to solve. I don't even change cables until they start going bad, as in breaking the connection. I had a pair of whirlwinds I used for 20 years. Whatever deficiencies they had were made up for by consistency due to their remarkable lifespan, and that was objective enough for me.

[Mark Hammer]

I pretty much agree with that.  Of course, I don't have a studio, I don't record albums, and I don't do concerts.  Maybe if I was engaged in something where the sonic stakes were higher, I might want to spend a little more than $25.  Maybe.  Ain't ever been there yet, but then I ain't ever left North America, neither.

[DougH]

Oooooh... You need to get out more...