What's a common occurrence in your hobby that you think shouldn't be?
What's a common occurrence in your hobby that you think shouldn't be?
For me it's driving while under the influence. If you couldn't tell, I like me some ganja. However I have long since held the belief that it is utterly insane to drive while under the influence of most substances, with maybe nicotine and caffeine being the exception. All too often I see other stoners smoking and driving, which I simply can't fathom. I've only operated a vehicle once under the influence and it was just to move a U-Haul around the block to a different parking spot, which was such a scary experience while high that I refuse to even consider getting behind the wheel again while high.
You're viewing a single thread.
Mine is music. And the common occurrence is the myths. Just sooooo many myths, from tonewoods, to signal chains, to techniques.. if you're into recording in any way typically you have the tools actually in-hand to test these myths and 99% dont. They then get rather angry at those that have and adjusted their outlook.
What you mean I dont need a $400 XLR that has
advanced geometry, solid Perfect-Surface Copper+, Hard-Cell Foam insulation, Triple Balanced geometry, and a Carbon-Based 3-Layer Noise-Dissipation System (NDS)??
Those big fancy words sound super important. It's even got special features such as a disconnected ground
Whereas almost every other “balanced” cable uses its shield as the ground reference, AQ Triple-Balanced cables use a separate dedicated shield that is only connected on one end.
God this is so bad, I don't even want to link it, but here you go Did I mentioned the Hard-Cell Foam (HCF) Insulation?
note
Click just the h for the actual link. Good luck :p
I LOVE a good rickroll! 🤣
I have van damme cables that cost me a fortune back in the day, still going strong but nowhere near 400 notes
Glad you enjoyed it.
The Van Damme cables seem less of a scam to me. Instead of specifications from fantacy land, they seem to have put some effort into actully making a better cable.
If nothing else, however rediculous "silver plated oxygen free copper" sounds to me for an audio cable, it is a lot better than "carban based noise dissapation layer".
I am curious, in what situation would you decide to buy something like a Van Damme over a regular name brand well made cable.
Basically two things at the time. One was the solder on the jack kept coming off on the cheaper cables at the time, so I'd lose signal. The second is I'm a clumsy git and would sometimes snag a cable popping it free from the device it was connected to. Keep tredding on cables and they dont like it, but the van dammes took it waay better.
I took an audio focused CS course in university and for my main project, I evaluated, among other things, the sound quality of various cables and a distortion pedal I had. None of the cables made a noticeable difference, same thing with the pass through mode on the pedal. I didn't set up a crazy long daisy chain to find out if they eventually did make a difference, but I bet even then it wouldn't be a big deal.
And for digital, it's even less so because you need a lot of error before you start mixing up 0s and 1s.
I've, in my own limited ability, looked at 50m of guitar cable verses 3 and seen a drop off in higher frequencies. Basically lost the "sparkle". Might depend on the cable and other factors though. You put a sine sweep through the signal chain to test it
It's been a while so I don't remember the specifics exactly, but I believe I used a square wave because it's easier to see frequency dropoff. The more that gets dropped (at least at the high end), the rounder looking a wave you'll end up seeing.
Now I'm wondering what happens if I use a square sweep to generate an IR on a guitar cab.... 🤔
I don't know if it needs to be a sweep, even. A square wave technically includes all frequencies to create that instant rise and hold because a freq high enough to rise that fast will also drop immediately after so a slightly lower frequency is needed to cancel that out, which then needs a lower one to cancel it out and so on. So you can see right away just by looking how well the square shape is maintained if all of the frequencies are making it through. If the corners look more rounded, then high frequencies are being lost. If the flat part looks bulgy, low frequencies are being lost. If the flat part looks squiggly, mid-range frequencies are being lost.
Though it is more of a rough brute force approach and a sin wave sweep will give a better idea of specific frequency response.
And I should correct what I said earlier, it wasn't that none of the cables were dropping anything, but that they all looked similar in what they were dropping and there wasn't much of a difference between a 10cm patch cable, a $2 3m cable, or a $30 3m cable.
If I ever get the space to set it up I might try it all out. I managed to get an IR out of the noise someone's guitar pedal made on a record.
Jim Lill sees your comment and he frickn LOVES it!
Only discovered him last year. I know Fricker was more open to these tests, though he can grate I know.