Evidence Audio Cables

[bos_mindwarp]

I totally believe that expensive cables make difference... it is just too bad that cables going from your rig to PA are not of same quality tho'

 

[Bassmanbob]

My only experience with "high end" cables are with Monster Bass Cables. I A/Bed them in a store using my garden variety cable and a store's monster and found a huge difference in the sound. So I bought two. I've not had any problems with them, and I've had them for about two years. I have no experience with any of the other "high end" cables you guys have talked about.

Does anyone have any experience with Bayou Cables? Butch Ammons who makes them custom ordered is a TBer here and advertises in the commercial forums area. The guys who have purchased his cables seem to be happier with his cables compared to Monster, Planet Waves and George L cables.

As far as cables having different sounds. I agree, they do. But some of us like the Warwick sound, some like the Rickenbacher sound, some like the Fender Jazz sound, etc... It's all subjective. Play and enjoy.

 

[BassJunkie730]

+1 high quality cables make a difference.

I totally agree. others may not notice but I do.

In fact I also use a specially formulated hand cream. It's amazing. My fingerstyle sounds so much better now than when I used St. Ives. I swear I sound like Jaco now!

I'll send you all some for the paltry amount of $40 per ounce

Personally I like the colorful cables, especially the pink ones with sparkles.

To me they sound the best.

(ala Peter Griffin) Aw, Man I'm so fricken trolling.

 

[Lyle Caldwell]

So we can agree that there are differences in cables, and some may prefer one brand to another?

There are differences in cables. Some have high capacitance and roll off the highs. Monsters fall into this category. They market them as sounding "full" but are in fact just dull. Plus they often break.

Among non-defective low capacitance cables, there is very little difference in sound, two identical cables having the same margin of difference as two similar cables from different manufacturers.

At the high end of things, two conductor cables with a telescoped shield reduce noise the best.

 

[Lyle Caldwell]

OK, you say we cannot trust Evidence's example...but how can we trust your examples then? You seem just as committed to prove the opposite....

I ask you to trust me because I would like to maintain whatever reputation I have here on Talkbass for honesty. If I record them and the Evidence clearly sounds better, you will all hear that. And I would admit that I was wrong.

That wasn't my experience with the other Evidence cable I borrowed. But maybe I got a bad one.

Go on, prove me wrong.

 

[Lyle Caldwell]

My only experience with "high end" cables are with Monster Bass Cables. I A/Bed them in a store using my garden variety cable and a store's monster and found a huge difference in the sound. So I bought two. I've not had any problems with them, and I've had them for about two years. I have no experience with any of the other "high end" cables you guys have talked about.

Now compare your Monsters to a 12 gauge cable made from a heavy duty extension cord with good quality plugs. If your Monster cable has 14 gauge wire, the extension cord will sound better. Just like the 14 gauge Monster sounded better than the generic 16 or 18 gauge cable.

 

[Modern Growl]

There are differences in cables. Some have high capacitance and roll off the highs. Monsters fall into this category. They market them as sounding "full" but are in fact just dull. Plus they often break.

Among non-defective low capacitance cables, there is very little difference in sound, two identical cables having the same margin of difference as two similar cables from different manufacturers.

At the high end of things, two conductor cables with a telescoped shield reduce noise the best.

I don't think that a treble roll off makes a cable sound "dull"
I'm cutting high's on my amp as it is w/ Monster cables. I would have to cut all the more so.

I'm not here to argue, I just don't think "dull" is the correct descriptive word...

over priced? yeah.
worth it? prob not.
piece of mind? works for me and makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

 

[Monomer]

Use 12 gauge lamp wire with Neutrik Speakons or Neutrik/Switchcraft 1/4" plugs. If you are running more than one cab, make each speaker cable the exact same length. Play on.

Pointless.

-------------------------------
Twisted pair, with copper sheilding (NOT foil sheilding) will work best.

For everyone who actually spent money on "better" cables, the price paid dosnt justify the few electrons that'll flow easier. Use what works.

 

[Lyle Caldwell]

I should have clarified. If you're running more than one cab in parallel, keep the lengths the same. Time of arrival. More noticeable in stereo but still a factor in mono.

But yeah, pointless in series.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I do wonder why none of these companies can put forth any empircal data.

Perhaps because it is not a measurable difference. Like i said before, there is no computer on Earth that can discern as many variations in color as human eyes can. Sometimes, there are things human beings can do better than machines.

But given the statements in this thread, the Evidence should be such an obvious improvement that even using my first suggested method (same part played three times) should be sufficient to prove me wrong. It just has to be clearly better. Right?

Well, it's not necessary to go there. We can debate like civilized people now, right?


For the record, I never said that the Evidence cable was "such an obvious improvement" or anything of the sort. I simply said it sounded better, that's all. I'm very picky and tend to notice things like that.

Have you ever worked in a studio? I have, and I have seen first hand that there is a huge variation in what different people can hear. I had a huge fight with a guitar player who I was recording some tracks for, and he was convinced that I had a weird flam in my track. "You hear that? You gotta punch that." It's not the bass track, I tell him, it's in the drums. "No it's not listen to it!" I am listening, it's not the bass. He spent 5 minutes trying to convince me until I could convince him to just solo the bass track. Guess what? Not there. He was astounded.

Some people can see better than others. Some people can hear better than others, so what? Maybe I and others are hearing something that you don't. Why would you care anyway?

Things happen all the time that science cannot explain. We don't have the universe figured out anywhere nearly as much as we like to think. The fact that something cannot be measured does not necessarily mean it does not exist. Absence of evidence is not the same thing as evidence of absence. Anybody that has studied science and physics at any level knows this.

I certainly can understand why people who are told they are not hearing something that they know they are would get nasty. What I don't get is why those who disagree would even care, much less get nasty and make snide remarks. I tried the Evidence cable. It sounded better than any other cable I had used. The difference was slight, but there and I notice it every time I use any other cable. Try it. If you don't like it or think it's no better, then great. End of story, really.

 

[jacove]

I would like to add to Marcus' excellent post that the difference may be subtle to some and major to others...to me the cables have been noticeable both when a/b'ing and in a live setting, to me that is a great improvement...for others that change might seem like peanuts...we hear and value things differently I guess...

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

If your ears are in such a pristine condition to be able to hear the difference between 2 cables (that are both working), then you arent playing loud enough!!!

 

[jacove]

here is a link to a parallel thread at another forum if anyone is interested...

Link Removed

 

[Marcus Willett]

So don't use scientific instruments to measure it then.

Instead pay a dozen people with this apparent super-hearing to demo the apparently super cables in proper A/B/X testing, all gauges and lengths equal vs. homemade Canare/Belden/householdlampcord/Nuetrik costing 1/25th as much), in an accredited lab and surely the majority, if not all, of them would pick the "better" cables? That'd be worth *million$*, IMO, to the first company that can prove it.

It wouldn't be worth anything though. Think about it. You don't hear a difference, so you're not gonna buy the thing (whatever it is). OK, so a test is conducted and sure enough, it was "proven" to sound better. OK, you gonna buy it now? You're gonna buy the thing that as far as you could tell made no difference and sounded like anything else after someone else told you that there's a difference there anyway? The one you can't hear? You gonna pay top dollar for that thing?

Despite how this thread may make things appear, I do not like spending a lot of money on gear. I didn't want to like it, I wanted to like the Mogami and Canare because they're cheaper.

 

[Marcus Willett]

WOW !!

"Again, new cable, not "broken in" as they say these were fresh from the bag."

I can't imagine how amazing the difference would be once the cables are broken in. Maybe I could even hear it at that point.

Geez, seems to be quite a few people who can hear it. I wonder who will be first to the lab to properly prove their results?

Yeah, nothing like a guy taking time to switch between cables, then playing through a Marshall, and noticing these subtle differences consistently. Hearing that's so advanced must be a burden of sorts. He can possibly hear me claking away on the keyboard as I type this? Imagine what he could hear in a proper lab environment?

Well, that's it for me. I'm bummed now that there's so much cool stuff I can't hear. Gonna go sulk.

You know, sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Some people can see better than others.
Some people can hear better than others.

The latter is no more unlikely than the former.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I might, but whether or not I would makes no difference because millions of people would, more likely tens of millions, and no other competitor could claim it - at least until they paid the super-hearer(s) top dollar to replicate the results, and many scientists would surely line up with major grant monies available to replicate it.

It'd change the world as we, who can't hear the difference and trust in proper empircal testing, know it.

I disagree. Sound, and in particular music, is such a subjective and personal experience that it cannot be quantified in such a way. Why? Because what sounds "better"? How do you measure that? You can't.

Years ago, keyboard magazine conducted an empirical test with music recorded at 44.1KHz, 16 bit and 24 bit and 96KHZ, 16 bit and 24 bit. Results?

Some people heard no difference at all. Some people heard a slight difference. Some heard a large one. Even weirder, among those who heard a "big" difference, there was disagreement over whether on sounded "better" than the other. Some preferred the lower bit, lower sample rate material. There is no "better" when it comes to music, and to a lesser extent, sound in general. There may be louder, higher fidelity, and other measurable factors, but "better"? Never happen.

 

[Marcus Willett]

NO ONE, despite many having so much to gain, has ever proven it.

No one has proven the Big Bang, but most people believe it. You can't even prove your mother loves you...do you doubt it?

 

[jacove]

Smash, do I get this right, let's say you heard 2 cables and you could actual hear a difference, would you then still not believe it because the lack of scientific proof? just curious...

 

[westland]

Like i said before, there is no computer on Earth that can discern as many variations in color as human eyes can. Sometimes, there are things human beings can do better than machines.

Sure there are; and with today's technology, you can pretty much build machines that in the lab outperform humans on any of the senses (this even goes for taste and smell, as IFF's labs have made a lucrative business of this).

But I think that Marcus is right is saying that humans often are better at realistic evaluation. This is because devices like cables are used in a dynamic environment.

Russel Hamm back in the 1970s addressed a debate similar to this thread, but concerning Tube vs. Solid State amps. He used both lab equipment and live musicians (and thought the latter to be more accurate and less articulate or consistent). He found that dynamics, and particularly overdrive response of tubes (at normal levels, tubes are overdriven around 30% of the time) to be different. He mapped this -- similar maps are behind the PODS and Sansamps of today.

I would guess that perceived differences in cables arise from simlar 'real world' factors -- ambient hum and interference, instantaneous power levels over the full dynamic range (which I guess might be 50-100 dB in practice), hysteresis and eddy currents and other dynamics of electronics, use and human hearing.

Humans tend to be inconsistent measuring devices because they 'anchor and adjust'. They tend to quickly make a decision about 'good' or 'bad' and then as more evidence comes in they may adjust from their initial decision, but never very radically (it serves as an anchor). They may even anchor before they've heard a cable, because, say, one is green and the other red, and green just sounds better (similar biases exist in say sports cars, where red cars always go faster )

So I find it fully believable that cables may alter the sound of an instrument ... especially with passive pickups, and very low signal levels. Lab measurements don't pick these differences up (yet) because we aren't using the right models to explain what musicians hear

 

[Marcus Willett]

I find it fully believable that cables may alter the sound of an instrument ... especially with passive pickups, and very low signal levels. Lab measurements don't pick these differences up (yet) because we aren't using the right models to explain what musicians hear

That I will buy. We're pretty sure neutrinos exist, but we can't measure or even find them yet.

I will add this. I think you may be on to something vis-a-vis passive vs active. I will freely admit that I didn't notice any difference at all when I used the Evidence with my one active bass, which surprised me because I expected to, and if the placebo effect was working its' mojo on me that should have been the case. But I didn't with the active bass, I couldn't detect any difference at all. With passive soapbars....maybe a difference, but very slight. With passive single coil, definitely. Not huge, but there.