I bought Xangsane from here:
https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256....0.0.72d438daWtCN6Z&mp=1&gatewayAdapt=glo2usa
https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256....0.0.72d438daWtCN6Z&mp=1&gatewayAdapt=glo2usa
My test protocol?
OK...
I get my favorite, most revealing speakers,
And my favorite, most revealing amp,
And my favorite, most revealing dac,
And my favorite, most well-recorded songs
And we listen while changing the cables out.
One of us will do the cable swapping, taking mental notes of any commentary until it is decided (or not) that there is a winner.
We swap places, and do it again. Then we compare findings to see if it's in our imagination.
If they correlate, I figure we're on to something.
Sometimes the differences are obvious. Sometimes not. But after days playing around like this we both concluded with 100% certainty that the cables can make a difference, for better or worse. We could swap cable A for cable B and tell the swapper what we were listening to, and get it right every time in some cases. That's scientific enough for me.
Did I use laboratory equipment for these findings? No. Just my ears.
/shrug
OK...
I get my favorite, most revealing speakers,
And my favorite, most revealing amp,
And my favorite, most revealing dac,
And my favorite, most well-recorded songs
And we listen while changing the cables out.
One of us will do the cable swapping, taking mental notes of any commentary until it is decided (or not) that there is a winner.
We swap places, and do it again. Then we compare findings to see if it's in our imagination.
If they correlate, I figure we're on to something.
Sometimes the differences are obvious. Sometimes not. But after days playing around like this we both concluded with 100% certainty that the cables can make a difference, for better or worse. We could swap cable A for cable B and tell the swapper what we were listening to, and get it right every time in some cases. That's scientific enough for me.
Did I use laboratory equipment for these findings? No. Just my ears.
/shrug
Thanks, at least they have specs.
I think this is about the worst one can buy, so for sure you will hear a difference. 🤣
In a last bid to convince you to buy quality, here's a good example, at a fraction of the price.
Mate them with original Neutrik connectors and you will enjoy them for the rest of your life.
https://www.musik-produktiv.com/gb/mogami-2549-neglex.html
Note that I am not affiliated with any of these brands. 🙂
Mate them with original Neutrik connectors and you will enjoy them for the rest of your life.
https://www.musik-produktiv.com/gb/mogami-2549-neglex.html
Note that I am not affiliated with any of these brands. 🙂
Just for the record, the following already mentioned (by me) cable is a dual OCC conductors + OFC braid
Neotech NEMOI-3220 Rectangular UP-OCC Copper Interconnect Cable
and its outer diameter is 10mm, just perfect for XLR Neutrik NC3MXX-14-B connectors.
To my ears they together sound great.
However, I always applied the XLR analog signal AES wiring diagram as from the following site with (very) good results.
XLR Pinouts for Audio
Please note that not all devices follow the AES standard and pin 2 and 3 polarities could be reversed, so first check.
Neotech NEMOI-3220 Rectangular UP-OCC Copper Interconnect Cable
and its outer diameter is 10mm, just perfect for XLR Neutrik NC3MXX-14-B connectors.
To my ears they together sound great.
Assuming I've realized it, the above diagram leaves me perplexed as it differs from that of AES Industry Standard (Pin-2 Hot).
However, I always applied the XLR analog signal AES wiring diagram as from the following site with (very) good results.
XLR Pinouts for Audio
Please note that not all devices follow the AES standard and pin 2 and 3 polarities could be reversed, so first check.
Last edited:
The everlasting "Pin 1" problem.
I believe Rane fully complies to AES standards, and I cannot see where it differs?
They mention AES several times in the paper, so I would not think they violate the standard in their drawings.
I think the clarkwire scheme is wrong or at least incomplete.
There is a -not for publication- 'Draft Revised AES-48-XXXX' pdf online for your reading pleasure. 🙂
I believe Rane fully complies to AES standards, and I cannot see where it differs?
They mention AES several times in the paper, so I would not think they violate the standard in their drawings.
I think the clarkwire scheme is wrong or at least incomplete.
There is a -not for publication- 'Draft Revised AES-48-XXXX' pdf online for your reading pleasure. 🙂
I am lazy, these days I mostly buy my custom length XLR cables from WBC (on Amazon) for both balanced audio cabling and AES/EBU - I have quite a bit of both. I do look at shield quality and capacitance per foot. I tend to prefer copper conductors (usually OFC)
I started with very inexpensive Chinese made cables which were difficult to plug and unplug in some of my gear. I used some of the old cables for test cabling on my RTX where their performance has been indifferent to "variable" read as unacceptable due to noise pick up. (Try doing measurements with equipment with noise floors below -100dBv and you will see the issues. (I am still working at it.)
I started with very inexpensive Chinese made cables which were difficult to plug and unplug in some of my gear. I used some of the old cables for test cabling on my RTX where their performance has been indifferent to "variable" read as unacceptable due to noise pick up. (Try doing measurements with equipment with noise floors below -100dBv and you will see the issues. (I am still working at it.)
the store here (diyaudio) sells Blue Jean cables which seem of good quality. I'm considering these when I finish my balanced component set.
on the other hand, there's a good chance that I might just visit the local pro audio store and buy what they have on hand.
more instant gratification.
on the other hand, there's a good chance that I might just visit the local pro audio store and buy what they have on hand.
more instant gratification.
Last edited:
@Netlist
The pin 1 problem indeed!
The advice I've heard is that pin 1 connects to the shield of the cable... and therefore not appropriate to be connected to signal ground.
that leaves the question in a balanced component chain where the signal ground -- like the grounds of each attenuator section -- goes?
I figure these go separately back through the power supply to the ground lift bridge (per the Pearl phonos).
shielding (pin 1) is a separate thing).
The pin 1 problem indeed!
The advice I've heard is that pin 1 connects to the shield of the cable... and therefore not appropriate to be connected to signal ground.
that leaves the question in a balanced component chain where the signal ground -- like the grounds of each attenuator section -- goes?
I figure these go separately back through the power supply to the ground lift bridge (per the Pearl phonos).
shielding (pin 1) is a separate thing).
The shortest path to the ground connected case. In absence of such a case (non-metal), the shortest path to the star point.
I agree it's complicated, otherwise the pin 1 problem would not exist.
I advise studying the AES draft paper I mentioned above. It's easy to find, but I will not post it here, as it is not for publication.
You will notice that exceptions exist in particular circumstances, but there's always a way to best practice.
Also, read the Rane page, which sums it up very well and provides visual examples of all possible cables connections.
I always keep it nearby as a reference.
My view is that each of us "believes" in something, but how reliable it is then it's a different thing.
The very fact that you declare that the problem is complicated proves it, in my opinion.
Hoping you realize that I'm saying this only because I need (really: we need) to realize in my turn the subject in the most objective way possible. 🙂
The Clark Wire & Cable site does this too
https://www.clarkwire.com/pinouts/xlr-audio-pinouts
I don't think so.
And this should not seem strange since the matter is complicated. 😉
Also if you open the link you will see that it contains many different diagrams, not only that one.
I agree that the subject is certainly complicated and what is worse is that there does not seem to be an authoritative reference that satisfies you, or me, or everyone, that's even those with different experiences or even different beliefs...
In other words, why should one consider the Rane site more reliable than other ones?
Last edited:
With all the drawings, it makes it the most valuable for a simple tech like me. 🙂
(Your) Experience matters, and for what my appreciation is worth, I liked your answer.
However, since there is probably more than one single correct answer, my mind feels the need to delve further, though.
I'll let you know... 🙂
OCC is Ohno Continuous Casting, invented and patented in 1986. Short history of the technique here, and why this is a good idea: https://www.hificollective.co.uk/sites/default/files/occ_explained_0.pdf
Was any listening done completely blind, with neither party knowing which cables were under test?
How would the guy plugging the cables in not know which cables he's plugging in?
We took turns. The listener didn't know.
This is an example of the dialogue between us might go like this:
Me: "Wait, let me go back in the song a little bit. Right there. When that cymbal crashes and shimmers into silence... I heard more than the last cable. Go back to the last cable. Yup, it's missing. Ok go back to the first. Ok that one is the one. Put that cable in the #1 spot. Your turn."
We'd take notes with pencil and paper and switch places.
This went on for hours. We'd have a drink or eat, maybe watch a movie or go out and play tennis. Come back later and play with it some more. After a lot of back and forth and waking up in the middle of the night and listening alone, I settled on the same opinion as he had developed before we started: the cables matter and the brand which was made of the OCC copper was our favorites. Interestingly, it was in the bottom half of the price range of what we tried.
It's been a while and I don't remember the brand because at the time I was more fixated on the fact that I was wrong about something I believed strongly.
