Originally Posted by drecar
...One question for you though, is Canare Cable widely used in Pro Audio?
Well, when I was playing and setting up the dates were from 1967 to about 1972 so, no. I don't believe that they existed back then and I couldn't tell you what we used. Frankly, this was the 60's and early 70's so what with the amount of herbs, and other things, my memory really isn't at all too clear. I call them the "lost years" I know I had one hell of a time but for the life of me can't remember the details. I did backstage work at, what was called the Civic Arena, and is now called the igloo, in Pittsburgh. I ran cable and setup mixing boards, etc. for the Doors, CTA, Steppenwolf, and too many bands to name. We did a lot of mixing in studios for many local "burg" bands, but the brands, quality, etc of the cable wasn't high on our list. Although we were
Over the last 20 years or so, I have personally experimented with most everything out there and consequently I am in the camp of (provided quality construction) a cable is a cable. I have wasted thousands of dollars on exotic aftermarket power cords for my Fender, Vox, and Peavy amps. No SQ difference. I even went the DIY route. Seriously, I can plug my Gibson 56 Paul into any of my amps with whatever cord my hand hits in my cord box and it all sounds the same.
I am no expert and don't claim to be. Hell, I wanted
to hear a difference. The horrible sound couldn't be coming from me
it must be inferior cables. Nope, its me all right
I am always amazed at the improvments that people claim with cables. They can be smooth, clear, open, tight, airy, transparant, and any other adjective you care to use. I just wish they would post some data on how
they were able to get the SQ to be more, smooth, clear, open, tight, airy, transparant, etc. Then I could mimic them. But despite many wars, arguments, locked threads, venom, nobody has ever been able to demonstrate why any difference could, should, or does exist. Though they all swear to it.