Cat5e vs Audio Snake, Hear Signal Loss of 100 meter cables
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 07. 2024
- I came up with a really cool test to easily and clearly hear the actual loss in signal cables using simple and relatively inexpensive gear.
the test setup allows you to hear the actual loss in the cables. So louder is more loss and brighter is more HF loss which means the cable is dulling the sound
00:00 Intro
01:10 Setup description
05:15 Pink noise hear loss in audio snake vs Cat5e
06:17 Results and cable info
07:30 Pink noise hear loss in audio snake vs Cat7
08:48 Summary and future tests
for more on SoundTools products check out soundtools.com/
SoundTools CAT Box: soundtools.com/products/catfam...
SoundTools SuperCAT Cable: soundtools.com/products/cable/...
Also I have started a CZcams membership area where I release videos early and post exclusive additional content for the huge price of $4.99 a month. An area where I can better interact with sound humans outside of the general public. Come join us if you are interested!
Link to join Dave Rat's exclusive CZcams Membership: / @daverat
Now people can advertise their vintage multicore analog snakes as sounding more “warm” than twisted pair snakes haha.
Yeah the capacitance chopping all the highs is 'warm'.
Its funny they like vintage sound and are fully against equalization and sound shaping.. Like its not the same thing in the end...
They might just use the analog cable for the bass players
,👍
I realize words like warm are subjective but I don’t think it means lower mid range. You can have “warm” high frequency distortion. I think that’s what most people are talking about. Think harmonies on revolver. Think Odessey and Oracle. Think the high fuzzy warmth of a Mellotron. Warmth and muddiness are totally different.
Wooo!!! Great to see a new video out Dave, hopefully this means you'll be treating us with more in the near future :)
Yep I've got some more coming
Dave, as a 30+ year audio veteran its easy to overlook the subtle details that DO make a difference. Thanks more making us think about those items! Looking forward to more info!!!
For those that are not understanding why louder and brighter = more loss, let me see if I can explain it to you. If I am not mistaken, Dave is running a null test. In a null test, the more equal/similar the two compared signals are, the less you will hear ( theoretically nothing if the signals are identical ). Which then means the more dislike the two compared signals are, the less nulling you will have. Data cables are made to a much higher standard than your typical analog copper snake. The loss in highs is a result of capacitance between the leads. More capacitance, more loss in highs. Longer cable lengths and lower grade cable are more prone to signal loss because of this. Data cables are designed to have less loss so that data doesn't get lost ( quite literally ). With a null test, you have two signals that are out of polarity with each other, in this case, we are reading the difference between each end of the cable. If the two signals are identical, you will have 100% nulling ( no sound ). He accentuated the highs on one of the signals so that there is no chance for there to be 100% nulling. What this allows is for you to hear the nulling that does or does not occur. So less volume and less highs mean less signal loss ( the two signals are more alike than different ). With the analog snake, you had more volume and more highs because the signal was not nulling as much, meaning that the signal at each end of the cable was more dissimilar. Does that make sense?
Yes it is kind of a form of null test with the balances line input of the mixes automatically performing the null. The balanced line mixer input automatically cancels out the identical signals so all we hear is the dissimilar aspects
Thank you A/Tech. Helped me get it.
Thanks for the explanation.
Hey Dave! Been a fan of yours for years ever since I first started doing music around 2011. Your information surpasses that entry level business and gets into the deep brass tacks and I really appreciate that about you, and I've been a fan of the RHCP since I can remember and I've seen them twice, once in Omaha in 2011 with Thundercat as the opener, and I suspect you were the man behind the console and it was one of the most full and crisp sounding rock shows I've seen, and I've seen over 100 shows since then. Just wanted to say I'm a big fan, and since you've uploaded again, quarantine must have you bored as F 😉 Lol
Awesome thank you
Cool test! Glad to see a new video!
Excellent and I have some more to come soon
I’ve did more then a few festivals for XM pre-merger where we’d pull back the audio from several stages to one broadcast center. We used good cat5 cable to run the feeds back to the booth. It was relatively cheap, small, light weight, and we usually just abandoned it in place on load out and saved time trying to get the hell out of there in the middle of the night. Sounded as good as any reasonably priced audio snake and you could just cut to the needed length as you set up. I imagine it would sound even better on better cable today. As an IT geek, I can tell you that the old stuff was good to 100mhz and the new stuff up to 350. 20 to 20khz is no problem. It’s got a shitload of twists so the noise rejection is pretty good as long as you stay away from power feeds. For live sound mixes that were often not pristine to begin with, it was plenty good enough.
William Wheeler gotta cross the power runs perpendicular 🙉
BuildYourOwnBass, indeed, but I can’t count how many times I saw someone try and run them together to save having to secure and cover another path. Lazy is everywhere I am afraid.
@@Bill_N_ATX sometimes there no other way for power cable.
👍
THANK YOU. This makes it really easy to explain to others!
Had to double check to see how long it has been since you uploaded a video. Love applying your techniques to what I do and seeing the improvements instantly. I've probably watched every one of your videos at least 3 times, some 5+. Can't wait for more.
Thank you Neil!!
As always, Awesome video Dave! Many thanks.
Wonderful and thank you!
So glad I found this channel, love it!!!
Awesome thank you!
good to have u back
A very clear and comprehencive approach to a real issue in cable construction and layout. Thank you.
Thank you Ian!
I can't express the gratitude I have for everything you share
Thank you Bob!
Dave. I love you man! You are like the NEW Bob Carver for my generation. One day, you got to tell us what you do for car audio in your ride. I have been using Cat5e and cat6 STP for years for audio. And I love it. I had a lot of people tell me they could not afford good speaker wires or RCA's, and I made them some for free when I heard that.
Dude. Thank you for making this video. I could tell often that some of the RCA's I bought from the store just did not measure up when I used them in car audio compared to some of the stuff I used at home. And I'm glad you made this video. It confirmed something I had known for really long cable runs. You rock Dave!
👍
About 10-15 years ago, I made what I call a Mix Rack. It was basically a DAW that sat on the stage with a remote session and control surface out front. This only ever got used when I would show up and there was something not right about the production supplied, a mix position that was in a booth and those sorts of situations. One thing that I had noticed right off the bat, is how clear my top end was when I eliminated the FOH snake - the mix rack would be sitting right next to the amp rack so there were no sends or returns going to FOH. Not such a big deal these days, but at the time it was an eye opener.
It would be interesting to do a test on the cross talk between the pairs for the audio snake and the data cable. At the end of your videos you should tell everyone to remember to click the like button so we don't forget. Thanks.
love your videos they are great for us sound nerds
Thankyou for the video . Pleas let this be the gateway to more !
More to come!
We are blessed with a new video :D
Very cool makes me happy that the videos are appreciated!
Very interesting, we switched over to data cable and stage box for our theater audio. It’s good to know we are ok for signal to stage
Steve Malone Did you switch to “analogue” stageboxes and are sending analogue audio over network cables, or did you go digital?
Have never clicked on anything so fast as a fresh Dave Rat test video!
I think the confusion in some of the comments stems from how you modded the cat box to monitor the difference between pin2 send vs return. some kind of polarity reversing / summing inside the cat box?
Also, Dave while you’re there could I pls get your recommendation for current production reference cans? Both my D2000s are dead :(
I will take a pic of the schematic and post on my FB page. As far as headphones, it's been a while and don't have a new recommend. Will keep an ear out
@@DaveRat you the best!
Thanks a lot sir I follow your strategy. It helps me lot.
Interesting video and showing how these cables perform side by side.
👍
@@DaveRat Thanks...
Phil
Very interesting indeed. Unrelated but interesting for me was the demonstration of the effect of reflective surfaces (your arm and your body) on what the mic was picking up as you started the demo.
Finally, a good CZcams algorithm recommendation! Really glad I found your channel. I love your scientific:subjective balance, and this video was fascinating. P.S. I'm staying because of the rat. :)
Awesome!!
Thank you Dave!.
👍
DAVE RAT I salute you my guy. Glad to see you still active. I owe my career to many of your teachings. I am a software engineer that is now building tools for sound guys. But you helped me with more knowledge about sound than a university. Who woulda thunk you guys need computer techs and apps in 2020. This video perfect example. If I ever see you lunch on me. In the immortal words of BLACK FLAG. WE GONNA RISE ABOVE! (With Dave's help :-) ) #SALUTE! 🙏🙏🙏
Awesome, made my day!
Cool, love the tech talk. Thanks
👍
Great vid. Thanks for the schooling
🤙👍👍
No idea i was even subscribed to you but that was really f*ing cool.
Awesome and thank you!
I missed the part where you explained the fact that we were listening to the balance differential and I was confused by the outcomes the whole time. Cool way to test!
Awesome and thank you!
Really good vid thank you.
Dave’s a true audiophile. Been watching his videos, reminds of my favourite Sound geek, my husband, you sound guys are all so similar lol - even tho he’s a re-recording mixer.. great channel!
👍
Awesome and thank you!
...aways pushing audio to next step evolution!!! Thanks Dave you inspire us aways!
And getting these comments and positive responses is really fun and cool
@@DaveRat hey Dave. ...i'd love to hear you about system alignement. Delays tower, front fill, side P.A. and subs. I've got so many good things from your subwoofer series ....would be really helpfull to watch your point of view on this theme, knowing that u are an on the road Master. Many Thanks mannnn,all the best .Gus
Thanks Dave
I designed, 24 years ago, the first and only (to my knowledge) ACTIVE INTERCONNECT. It had excellent reviews in the Audio Press at the time. It could compensate any capacitance, which is
the chief culprit, responsible for the high frequency loss across the cable. Other factors for the poor performance are the usually inadequate drive capabilities of the pre-amp output stage to
drive a capacitive load which a cable presents to the pre-amp. Audio cables usually are of a larger diameter so as to minimize the capacitance per unit length. I used a little known circuit
topology to completely compensate the cables capacitance, very simple circuit, very effective. The user could even use his already high quality cables which would be even more beneficial.
And it was possible, by the user to tailor the cable driver to his exact preference by simply plugging in a different value of resistor.
I was active in the High End Audio game for only a few short years. Designed the first Digital Pre-amp which had the Golden Ears Brigade buzzing. Left that game because I found the
people involved in it to be very uneducated, even downright unethical, besides, my Industrial Electronics side of the company took of exponentially, so I had very little time anyhow.
But I often wondered how far it could have gone. The main opposition even offered me to become their technical director as they were unable to compete.
Data Cables are not very suitable for audio. It is misleading to say the have data rates of 10 to 100MHz and more. True, but that's only possible with very special drive and receive circuitry.
These drivers and receivers use Pre and De- Emphasis for instance, something that cant be done with Audio. Its a fascinating subject, but it requires a great deal of specialized know-how.
Happy listening.............
Very cool and agreed on the close minded audiophile community. As far as data cables for analog, they are actually extremely effective and useful. To be able to have a low loss 4 channel disconnectable audio cable by using cat5e or higher cable makes our job in pro audio much faster, simpler and cleans up setups.
@@DaveRat Are audio electrons different in any form from digital electrons?
#1: Common mode noise rejection can be 10x better on star-quad or "quad" audio cable. This can be more important than high frequency losses, especially with low-output dynamic microphones like an SM58.
#2: High frequency loss is a combination of output (source) impedance *and* the capacitance of the cable. an active XLR output on say a Behringer x32 mixer is 75ohms so that should be able to drive 500METERS of almost any audio cable without any noticeable frequency loss. There would be no real sonic benefit in using cat5e cable for *line-level* audio use other than cost (which is nice) but for sure you should warn people about the folly's of using cat5/6/7 wire for *microphone level* signals.
I hope to do some common mode rejection tests comparing snake cable, Cat5e stp vs u/stp and let our ears hearing be the info to make appropriate decisions for the application
Greg Simpson Star-quad consistently has greater HF loss than single pair due to higher capacitance that is unavoidable in quad construction. I avoid star-quad for long runs for this reason.
20 Million thumbs UP..Sir
Where have you been man? Glad to see you making videos again. I really enjoyed this one. Your older pro audio mixing videos were really great as well. Will you be doing any more of those?
Right now I'm doing videos on cable testing I'm not sure if I'll do more mixing stuff or not but I will try and keep coming up with ideas
@@DaveRat cool. I found your mixing videos really helpful for setting up my bands pa. Thanks for the content.
Man... The new cable is Approved.
Interesting video Dave. A quick question: if you were to A-B test the analogue and and digital cables in a production/live environment, do you think the audience would perceive a difference?
I think that if I turned the high hat off, muted the backing vocals and put a 200ms time delay on the guitars, the audience would not know the difference.
That said, incremental degradation is a concern for some applications. 1st, knowing that using cat5e for analog is not a degredation, I feel is important. Cat5e based diaconnectable 4 channel stage boxes are really convenient. Also knowing the best tools for the job is important. So knowing that you can run analog over Cat7a for much longer distances with less loss than analog over audio snake is useful.
Nice demo! Cat 5e specs 1GHz (1000MHz, 1000000 kHz) which is indeed a comfortable margin above 20kHz. Given the advantages in terms of weight and durability, this is clearly a no-brainer choice. .. thanks for make it so vividly clear. Of course someone is bound to say, "I hate digital. I won't even use cables designed for digital in my signal path regardless of their numerous advantages!"
Awesome!
Thank you
I would never have believed that you could run audio through a data cable. Wow. Live and learn.
Was totally surprised by this result. With higher amount of signal carrying material, the thicker wire gauge, I expected the audio snake to do better than the data cable. Wonder if it's the extra twists in the data cable that help improve signal stability... Also didn't realize I had missed this one. Thanks, now back to wrapping my head around DI's and transformers in your latest videos...
Yeah, I think the precision twists and things like insulator composition may play a role in extending hf response, I was a bit surprised as well
Could you do a comparison of cross talk between channels? How about induced AC line noise?
I'd have to think a bit on the crosstalk as I don't have the expensive test gear. Will ponder a method to test using simple gear. I have a video on stage box sheilding done I can post soon
And there's the rub with using computer cable. While STP audio cable mat have HF rolloff at long cable lengths, Ethernet cable does not have the shield or the right number of twists per foot to protect baseband audio from EMI.
Ethernet cable actually has different twist rates in each pair, which I believe is designed to reduce crosstalk. At least that's what I was told.
It can also come with individual shields per pair in the higher categories.
@@Manofcube This is wondering i didn't know a few months ago. I did some work installing CAT6 and we used a $13k tester to verify the runs, which includes crosstalk testing. It's extremely sensitive to how much length is is untwisted to break out into the punch block.
It's crazy how much engineering goes into creating the cable with such tolerance while being cost effective.
Wow, I had forgotten that I have a compressor on my computer monitors and I wasn't hearing the difference and I was scratching my head for a minute cause I couldn't hear the difference right away... just the attack and release.. Ha Ha :D ... Us nerdy people and our gadgets... Thanks Dave for all you do for us... Been doing sound for a long time but I always learn something valuable every time I watch your videos... I need to definitely (Turn off the Compressor and Limiter) when you are giving sound examples...
Interesting and the details that trip us up can be endless
Looks like I will be raiding my sons thousand foot spool of cat 7a cable, my son has a spool of cat 8 cable on order should I expect any improvement that is noticeable between cat 7 and cat 8 ?.
This is to show using cat cable for analog is a viable adventure
@@DaveRat Wild. I never would have guessed. I suspect that buying a Radial Catapult ISO with audio transformers is a better idea than the non-iso ones over long runs.
Nice!
👍👍👍
Interesting. Could there be more capacitance in the blue cable or somewhere in the signal chain? My elec theory is very rusty.
I don't have specs on the blue cable but am guessing it has more capacitance due to design, lower quality insulators, and slightly thicker wire gauge
I have a bunch of shielded procab cat5e cable, but the shield isn't connected to the jacket of the ethercon plug. Can I still use cat boxes with this to run balanced audio over?
It doesn't need to attach to the Shell of the other con but the RJ45 jacks must have a metal housing around them they cannot be standard rj-45 they have to have the metal and the shield must be attached to that metal wrap
@@DaveRat Thanks a lot, that cleared it up. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my newbie question! :)
Excellent vid - thank you! The super cat is shielded cable, so I'd assume that any good quality shielded/grounded CAT5e cable would be acceptable, but would appreciate your thoughts on that? Is super cat larger copper than "normal" network/data CAT5e? I use Ubiquiti ToughCable carrier grade cable for all my data runs and it's far superior quality to any other grounded/shielded cable I've used professionally. Thoughts? Thanks, Dave! Great stuff.
Yes, any sheilded Cat cable will work. The Supercat's big advantage is durability, coilability and the pro mic cable feel. Polyurethane jacketing is the way to go for pro portable cables.
Great comparison of the cable types!
But what about the phase shift due to propagation delay over the 100 m?! Doesn´t this add to the difference in signal between the voltage drop and the direct connection?
Hmmm, may be a bit out of my knowledge realm but I am thinking that propagation delay over distances of 100m or so is so slight that it is irrelevant to audio frequencies. Conversely, phase shift due to capacitance and inductance are real and can be significant factors
25yrs ago I was using cat5 in vehicles due the the issue of coaxial cable being more prone to the magnetic induction of AC currents on the chassis. The only other problem that was a significant factor at the time was, most car audio gear was single ended and not balanced. So people needed equipment with low impedance signal systems as to mitigate the imbalance and common mode noise
Super cool
How about creating a high impedance audio source to highlight small cable differences?
I think this already highlights small differences well in real world applications. That said I will work on a guitar cable test setup
If this is true, then why are we still using XLR cables? Why don’t we have RJ-45 connectors on audio equipment? As a DJ using powered speakers, do you recommend converting my balanced cables to cat 5 and then back to balanced?
The video is to demonstrate that cat5e cables do not degrade the sound and are slightly better. That said, the differences are so slight, they can be looked at as irrelevant.
As a DJ, if you did use a Cat5e you could send, left, right, vox mic and spare channel down one shielded cat5e instead of 4 Mic cables, could be useful
Thank you for the reply. I might try that!
just clarifying. a " perfect cable " in this test would be silent and the loud frequencies would be the frequencies that have losses on real cables.
Yeah that's what was confusing me
1) What is the best speaker cable you have found?
2) Where can I buy Supercat unterminated for home hi-fi use in the UK?
3) Do you notice much roll off between speaker cable in the smaller runs like 3-10 meters? General home hi-fi? Would Supercat allow for better sound in these setups as well or just for longer runs?
4) Would you recommended shielded CAT vs speaker cable for home hi-fi?
As far as speaker cable, it really depends on the application and how you prioritize features. Durability, flexibility, coilability, overall diameter, cost, # of conductors, and wire gauge are all important in varying degrees based on application, length, program material, load impedance and so on.
Generally shorter cables and thicker wire gauge are better for sound quality. Beyond that, I would say all the esoteric high cost cables are waste of money that could be better spent on other aspects like amps and higher quality speakers and even if you have reached the pinnacle of all other aspects, I would say spending the same amount of money on improving room acoustics will see more results than ultra expensive cables
Dave, can you try the same audio cable coiled up vs. audio cable off the reel on a straight run (like from the stage to a mixer like you might find in a small room.
I know sometimes we leave the audio cables coiled up (as extra length not needed). Just wondered how that affects analog signal quality.
Hell no! Oh my that would be way too much work! Is 6 miles is not enough for ya?
All in good fun and yeah, the twisted pairs should be cancelling out the emf that would make the coils into inductors so uncoiling will either so nothing or have less issues and it already went way longer than expected.
Bit confused at the end there Dave. Did you mix up which ones in the up position?
let me know the time that the confusion or the you have a question about and I'll go back to listen to it and see if I can clarify
Ahhh, no, at the end, 8:31 the cat7 is quieter, therefore less loss. I say duller as well but that was a mistake.
From 6 mins, I got a little confused with the brighter W1 cable being brighter and with more gain, but the losses are more in the high frq'y of the audio W! cable. Are you suggesting the brighter sound of the W! cable is due to lower frequency loss, causing the brighter sound? I can clearly hear there is a difference, but I am not in the room with you. Would you be looking at using cat 7 in the future over the W1 audio cable?
The setup let's you hear the loss in the cable. As in, if highs are sent and lows are sent but less highs make it through but all the lows make it through, and we listen to the difference between the input and output, we would hear a bigger difference in the highs.
This demo was mainly to show that Cat5e cable is very effective in transporting analog audio. Being as good if not better then standard audio snake
@@DaveRat Thank you for that clear up. I was hoping you meant that. Regards, Ian.
I’d like to see testing on this with balanced audio instead of just looking at one side by itself. Is capacitance between hot and cold going to have an effect? Also crosstalk as someone else mentioned.
Cool and I did a video on crosstalk.
czcams.com/video/gGgPDEz5sNU/video.html
I did a series on speaker cable losses as well.
Will ponder a way to do capacitance or at least a way to hear both wires. There are some null test videos out as well.
@@DaveRat You could do a polarity inversion comparison between original signal and what passes through audio vs Cat cable. That seems the simplest way to test them as balanced lines. I'm really interested in this whole discussion. For years I've had an exam question in my fourth semester electronics course (Audio Engineering majors) where they are asked to choose between Cat5 cable or unbalanced+Shielded cable for an emergency recording using passive ribbon mics. The point is for them to choose balanced over shielded, but I have also told them that balanced audio cable would be preferred, perhaps I've been wrong.
category 5 cable is 4 twisted pairs. category 7 cable is 4 twisted pairs separated by a core insulator and each pair has a grounded shield wrap accompanied by an outer grounded shielded wrap for the whole cable data cable is designed to carry a differential signal pair while audio cable is designed to carry a differential signal with a ground reference
Yes, Cat5e can come in 4 twisted pairs, UTP or an overall sheild
s/utp.
I actually custom designed and manufacture a Cat5e that is 4 individually shielded twisted pairs with seperate ground wires as well, U/STP. Cat6a is S/UTP with an overall shield and cat7 is S/STP with individual and overall shield.
What is interesting is that all the new technology involved in designing these high quality data cables makes them actually better at carrying analog audio, than most analog audio snakes.
If you are interested, here is a video testing crosstalk between unshielded pairs when running analog down Cat5e S/UTP
@@DaveRat there's the difference. once you add shielding to the pairs, it functions as a coaxial cable. i heard you mention Cat5 and cringed at the thought of cross-talk in an environment with 3-phase power and air handling systems probably running on noisy variable frequency drives or worse, open contact motor-starters
Does the fact that the cable is coiled many times effect what we’re hearing?
With twisted pairs, the coiling of the cable has a minimal impact but can slightly effect the sound.
When comparing differing cables, as long as they are both in the same or similar coil, then coiling would bot a factor.
I like this approach. It fits in well with my habit of putting a tweeter and cap across power and speaker wires to hear problem. I got that idea from someone in the car audio industry. He said he installs a tweeter with a crossover and a burnout preventer on the output of his sub installs and mounts the tweeter near the drivers head. It sounds awful if you clip the sub amp so his customers don't blow up as much gear. CZcams didn't really convey how that worked either, but in his FLAC file it was plain as day.
It would be nice if you posted some high bitrate lossless audio files of this. Frankly I can't hear anything except a slight gain difference over CZcams in that first test. The second test showed a clear gain difference, but how does it sound with makeup gain? And how do the cables do with interference? Split a lamp cord and run one conductor through the reel and connect an old-fashioned light bulb and dimmer. That'll tell you what's got good interference rejection and what doesn't.
Love the tweeter to highlight square wave distortion idea!
Dave, would you mind mic'ing the speaker next time? I hear a tiny difference, but honestly, it is so small (especially considering how much the high frequencies were boosted) that I can't see a tangible reason to go digital of your analog snake is still passing relatively clean audio.
What are your thoughts?
If digital companies had to pay for analog audio cable price they would be broke.. Maybe selling the analog snake and going digital you can improve and still save money
@@josearaujo8616 I agree with you, I just don't think that there is an advantage to upgrading if your current analog snake setup is still passing high grade audio. I was thinking that the difference would be much greater than it turned out to be. The reason that I ask is I have 64 digital inputs in my interface setup, but to get audio from the tracking area into the interface, I ran an analog snake from the interface to the tracking room. This was a lot cheaper that trying to set up some kind of Dante / AVB setup (which would have required buying new expensive gear and selling my current gear at a loss), and the sound quality is still outstanding, in my opinion. :)
@@robertsimpson5801 I tend to agree in a studio, although honestly I think you would have much better quality just going digital all the way, acd after the instrument or mic and then digital via wireless or cable, but musicians are kind of very superticious abour their sound. In gigs, the difference for the audiance is neglectible, the quality of the sound is more dependent on your position on the venue than any cables being used. And on Hi-fi listening, just run short cables and don't worry. Too much worry about tone and sound, IMHO... it should be about enjoyment and experience.
I don't know, the high frequency difference was pretty noticeable. Especially when he pulled out the Cat7 spool. Tbh I didn't expect to be able to hear it due to the typical CZcams compression loss that kinda ruins most pro audio processor reviews. So I was surprised just how audible this shift was here
@@rdean150 I guess my ear is not that good, or maybe I have significant high frequency hearing loss, because when he gave the high end that significant EQ boost, I could hear the sound of the upper frequency noise increase, but when he was switching between the two, I heard a very slight difference, but something so small that I don't think anyone would know if you were switching between the two during a live show (assuming no audible click when switching).
It's exciting. But I am confused. Does that mean I have to rewire my studio with standard cat 7 cables and substitute my expensive mogami audio cables for a better frequency Range?!
This is to show that cat5e is a useful way to transport analog audio without degredation concerns. But for a studio, you may find these cool
soundtools.com/audio-over-cat5-systems-page-wallcat4.html
What is the source impedance driving the cable?
It's low but good question, don't know other that the test measures the same using the IVIE pink noise generator, the small mixer and the output of my PONO music player.
I figure that since we use a variety of common gear to drive cables, then using a variety of gear similar, would be the best test source.
whats your opinion on fiber optic to xlr extenders?
All good, we use digital audio over fiber and digital audio over cat5 all the time.
If the signal is analog, then converting to digital and back to analog will add cost and latency
Can you run phantom power?
Yes, separate 0hantom power can run on any or all channels
Hi Dave!
We observing losses especially at HF. I'm just thinking if it counts, or not, that you made an air-core coil with about 100 turns from that cables (technically a low-pass filter). I don't want to argue, with your findings, just asking.
Hmm, well the audio snake had less turns and tested the same or worse, so if that's the case, is even better than it tests with the coiling disadvantage.
Also, since it is not uncommon to leave excess cable coiled up, perhaps real world.
But actually, twisted pair wire, especially really perfect twisted pairs, eliminates the coiling inductive issues.
I was wondering the same thing about low pass filtering. Seems like a non issue. My question is then: how to wire cat 5 cable as a snake. 4 pairs. 4 channels? How do you ground them?
Use shielded cat5 cable and a common ground/shield.
On a console, all XLR pin 1 are connected together. Having a snake that connects pin 1 together is all good
Nice way to actually listen to signal loss! A question, doesn't the roll of cable act as an inductor, which may cause extra HF loss?
Yes and I will do comparisons of coiled, non coiled and twisted pair speaker cables in parts 2 and 3 so you can hear those differences as well.
@Marcel Ooms: Also, a cable has capacitance between the conductors which increases roll-off. Lumped cable model.
@@deanedgx Shure, but I think the effect will be small.
If you're listening to the current flow in the cable, do consider that cat5e is about 3 or more times the resistance per meter than good twisted pair, haven't done the math on what level difference that will equate to, just a thought, and what about noise immunity on the cat5e vs the snake? ... curious
It really depends on the wire gauge of the Cat5e and audio snake, In this test the Cat5e is 26 gauge, the audio snake is 24 gauges and the Cat6a prototype cable is 23 gauge
Thank you!
🤙🤙🤙
@@DaveRat is it STP or FTP cable?
@@DaveRat is it STP or FTP cable?
The violet cable is a s/utp called SoundTools superCat
SoundTools also has a SuperCat sound cable that is u/ftp with even higher specs
@@DaveRat is there common shield for all pairs? Is there any crosstalk between pairs? Or twisted pair balanced signal eliminates it? Will it work with unbalanced signal?
Very nice that you are doing this sir .. people don’t believe in cat6 and cat7
👍
I am also a little confused. Why is losing the high frequency in the data cable better?
What is so cool and unique is that the test setup I made let's you listen to purely the loss in the cable. And less loss is good.
I agree, with Dj Vertigo, generally cable losses increase as you go higher up in frequency. Having said that, this is audio, and on a properly impedance terminated cable over 100m, I'd not expect to see (or hear) any appreciable difference. A better test would be an aural rest including both the sends and returns, and also a spectrum analysis of both the sends and returns. On the second test, the levels weren't the same either, so difficult to make a reasonable by ear assessment. Even better would be S11, S21 and S22 network analyses.
@@nezbrun872 Hmmmm, so capturing data through measurement gear is better than actually hearing what that loss sounds like? Sort of like, would be better for me to describe something very small that is naked to the human eye with its weight, dimensions and chemical makeup and show a data set and graphs than it would be for us to actually look through a microscope and see it it with our eyes?
Is not seeing small things magnified through a microscope just as relevant as hearing magnified low level things with our ears?
Perhaps its not about better or worse but rather about having additional info can be beneficial in understanding.
Just some thoughts to ponder
@@DaveRat Hmm Dave. I suggest you give Nezbrun a little more credit. He has 30 years of analogue and digital design experience behind him.
Any length of cable is electronically a series resistor (1), a series inductor (2) and a parallel capacitor (3).
This is literally a 2nd order low pass filter.
If you're running high currents through your cables then low resistance (=> high diameter copper) will be of your concern.
If you're running high frequency signals, where ideally there is zero current, then the low pass characteristics will become a real problem. This is especially an issue for digital signals, as they are very high frequency, which is why digital cables are designed differently from analog speaker wires.
Would the results be different if the wires are not in a coil?
I did a series on hearing the loss in speaker cable that covers the coil aspects. Turns out that twisted pairs make the coiling a non issues.
Not a lot of things get me to click a notification faster than a new @Dave Rat video ..
Thank you!
Hi. I'm a newbie and I'm currently experimenting.
I'm planning to buy a cat5 utp cable and use it as speaker cable. Currently I'm using a gauge 8 speaker cable.
Can anyone help or tell me if cat 5e utp will be good replacement for my current speaker cable.
Thanks in advance
Oh my, cat cable is 23 gauge to 26 gauge, which is very thin for using as speaker cable. You would need to bundle over 100 individual 24 gauge wires to reach the low resistance of 8 gauge.
Or since there are 8 wires each cat5e utp, you would need over 13 cat5e x 2 to run a speaker.
Over 26 cables 8n parallel to replace a single would be quite messy and not ideal
@@DaveRat
Hi thanks for your reply. I really appreciate it.
does UTP Cat5e sounds better?
And, does thicker cable sounds better for audio?
👍
I've used Cat5 cable as speaker cable for years. It may be 5e, I'm not sure, it's the purple sleeved cable... It's the solid core stuff. I read an article on the TNT Audio website a long time ago, made some up and haven't looked back. Sold all my expensive posh speaker cable. They also recommend making a plaited version which I did do a few times but the thumb blisters were a pain :\
Great video, thanks :)
Heh, lamp wire works just as good. Speaker cables deal with large signals - the effect of the cable is going to be minute at best. On the mic side, the signals are very tiny, so loss in the cable, and the frequency response of the cable (which is only relevant when the cable is very long relative to the wavelength of the signals you're dealing with) will make more of a difference.
That's it. I'm using my RJ45 for my RCA's instead of buying expensive audio cables 😅 Thanks Man very informative video!
🤙👍🤙
High frequency roll off is preferable to across the range frequency loss as you can upp the treble a bit to reform the loss , less loss in midrange and lower range from w1
With linear loss across all frequencies you can add gain, losses that are different at differing frequencies, it is extremely difficult fo add back in the correct frequencies. If treble is lost, at a rate of increasing loss of 1.53 DB per octave from 9.2k and your treble knob is at 6k with a linear boost, how is that going to fix it?
Using complex filters and their associated phase shifts and latency to try and repair frequency dependant losses quickly can become a messy rabbit hole to fix.
That said, this test is to show that cat5e works as good or better than audio snake for transporting analog audio. Which is pretty clear to see/hear
@@DaveRat That makes sense that if the cable causes treble roll off so great as to act like a filter, it can't be reovered through treble gain at console.
It's not that it can't be regained as much as much as it is difficult to regain it accurately.
Several years ago, I did some tests comparing analog down an analog snake to running aes3 down an analog snake. In headphones, on the send side, it was very difficult to hear much difference between the analog and AES signal.
But when we ran one side of the PA signal down the 100 meter main snake analog and the other side as an AES signal, myself and all the other audio techs were able to hear that the analog side of the PA was duller sounding when doing blind listen tests, plus we were able to pick which was analog, even when the left right signals were swapped in several more blind listen tests.
Attempts to EQ the analog side to sound like the AES side just resulted in the sides sound different different, but never the same.
I did the testing because I had been touring the US with a large K1 system and was well accustomed to the sound, when I got to Europe and hired the exact same system from a sound vendor there, i felt the system did not sound right. Doing the AES vs analog for the return lines was part of the testing.
The main issue though that was causing the problem I was hearing was that they had inserted an additional digital unit after my analog console for signal
distribution which made the sound even worse than pure analog or analog converted to aes3
Dave, what about the comparison of OHMS per foot and also the Capacitance value of each coil?
Resistance will cause some voltage drop or level drop but pure voltage shouldn't affect the tone and can be made up by gain. As far as capacitance, the role doesn't really affect it has it's too far apart between the wires and twisted pairs are pretty much impervious to coiling
For the record. “Warmth” does not mean less high end. It means a pleasant and harmonically diverse crunchiness and crispiness, for lack of better terms, across the entire audible spectrum. In my opinion of course. You can’t get the Oddessey and Oracle sound by overdriving a single component. I’d love to know how it’s done. What is the cheapest way to get that full spectrum fuzziness? Help!
Hmmm, "warmth" as a way of describing sound leaves much to interpretation. I perceive warmth as the difference in sound of a warm temperature venue vs a cold temperature venue. Or an amp and speaker the gets hot from being driven hard and loses the sparkle of highs and the lows become less dynamic and muddled.
As far as distortion, have ya looked at my pcm60 as a distrtion video?
Can these pass phantom power
Yes, they pass phantom. I did a test last week with phantom over 1000 feet of shielded cat5e
I've watched it three times. Can you please explain how high frequency "loss" results in greater amplitude of the high s at the return?
You're not listening to the signal itself, you're listening to the *voltage drop* of that signal.
Yes, as googlegnome mentioned, we are listening to the loss in the cable. So more loss results in less getting to the end of the cable.
Ahhh, no, at the end, 8:31 the cat7 is quieter, therefore less loss. I say duller as well but that was a mistake.
We're listening to pin 2 of the send and pin 2 of the return. Phase cancellation reverses what we're listening to; it's not what is still there, it is what has been lost.
@@prospekt1909 Now it makes sense!
Do you worry about hum and buzz in the Cat5 in a live setup?
I know the twisted pairs are supposed to help with noise rejection, but with each mic firing at different times, it's a less balanced load.
Mic cable has a shield that the ethernet doesn't.
Yes the twisted pairs on Cat5e cable do better at rejecting him and buzz than regular audio cable and since, like audio cable each mic is on a separate twisted pair so each mic has excellent rejection.
Also, all of our products are designed for shielded cat 5e cables and well as we designed and make Cat5e cables as well.
Soundtools.com
Check out it out, it's cool stuff
@@DaveRat It is incorrect to say that twisted pairs reject hum and noise. In fact each core theoretically should PICK UP the hum and noise equally if it is from a source an infinite distance away (i.e. NOT an adjacent cable). The rejection is performed by the balanced input amplifier and is a function of how well matched it is and where the shield is referenced. Not all equipment conforms to AES48.
5ge balanced input rejects common mode signals induced equally on both wires, twisting the wires helps make sure any noise is induced equally.
@@DaveRat The point is that neither are ever exactly equal so what you need to know is the actual rejection in dB.
Your test only shows that larger gauge cable has a lower resistance (we're talking about
Well, not sure if a distorted +20 signal is overly relevant to real world practical for most applications
As far as crosstalk, I believe a did a video on that already using practical and real world signals
No Cat5e available with individually shielded pairs? perhaps a Google search is in your future.
Not only is individually shielded Cat5e quite common and easy to find and can be used where very high levels of crosstalk rejection are needed, I actually designed a cable that Soundtools manufactures and sells that is individually shielded pair Cat5e plus each pair has a dedicated ground wire. SuperCat Sound cable.
Though the grounds get connected together for an RJ45, this cable came be terminated as a conventional XLR tails as well.
What I am doing is showing a small glimpse of why Cat5e works so well for the huge variety of applications that analog over Cat5e is being deployed successfully.
It's truly amazing how funtional, useful and practical a 4 channel disconnect able, readily available cable can be and the sound is as good if not better than audio snake.
It really is a game changer.
When the "hack" is actually an upgrade.
If you invested in a TDR (Time Domain Reflectometer) a few things become clear. STP CAT 5 is 110 to 120 ohms impedance. To eliminate the issues of cable capacitance, etc except delay, go with a digital stage box. Sampling as close to the source gives the cleanest signal. Unfortunately all digital DSP, A/D, D/A conversions take time so there is latency. Running one CAT 5 to a 48 Channel stage box with 16 returns is much easier for the roadie.
The big importance with data cable is shielding. It is UTP or STP. Don't skimp here. Next in line is loss. Smaller conductors have higher end to end resistance than larger cable, but most snakes are about the same conductor size. Capacitance per foot attenuates high frequency when the load is higher in impedance than the cable. Lower capacitance results in higher impedance and less loss at high frequencies.. which is what you want for a cable passing 350MHZ or less as eg a CAT-5E. Yes less is fine such as DC to 50KHZ. Watch for higher current phantom power mics. They may have too much voltage drop on a long cable (500 ft +) to function properly. FYI, CAT5 cable makes excellent Data Cable such as DMX. It is the perfect impedance for it. Many audio snakes are built with anti-static insulation so the cable is not microphonic. google cable rustle for this effect. Digital network cable will have mixed results in this realm. Many audio snakes have larger conductors with more capacitance per foot for durability in handling. This results in lower impedance and higher capacitance load per foot. The Dielectric loss in audio cable is pretty high in some snakes as materials are made for flexibility, durability, and take road abuse. Google dielectric heating and loss. This is energy absorbed by the insulation. To prevent loss of high frequency data, data cable is built with very low dielectric loss insulation.
Most microphone cables are about 60 ohms impedance. CAT5 is 110 to 120 ohms. This is closer to the 200 to 600 ohm microphone input impedance of mixers.
Interesting and also, it's pretty interesting that cat5e cable works as well or better than more expensive per channel pro audio snakes.
Using Cat5e for transporting analog audio is a simple way to have disconnectable 4 channel snakes with thinner cables that are readily available.
Also, pre wiring a building with inexpesive shielded Cat5e allows you to transport day or analog audio, com, dmx, and AES 3 anywhere in the building. Rather than running special audio cables.
@@DaveRat As CAT5 is not made for heavy handling, this won't replace your microphone cables and the shield is on the outer of all pairs. They are not individual shielded pair cables, so crosstalk will exist, where levels would be too low to affect digital.
@isettech well sort of except that actually I designed and have made in Germany custom Cat5e cable that I buy 10 kilometers at a time and sell under the SoundTools brand that is polyurethane jacketed and built stronger than mic cables and winds easily. It is the cable in the video. Also there are several other companies making high quality entertainment grade Cat5e.
As far as crosstalk, here is a video doing a demo on crosstalk with analog down Cat5e S/UTP
czcams.com/video/gGgPDEz5sNU/video.html
Oh, and also, I designed and soundtools sells a Cat5e U/STP cable with individual ground wires per shielded pair as well.
Love your comments and love that all the concerns have already been addressed, are being made and deployed.
It's funny, moment you started talking, I'm like, "I've heard this guy's voice before". Couldn't place it......thought maybe I ran into you in the trenches somewhere (nope). But then I realized there's a RHCP FOH vid that I saw years ago. Weird to remember a voice for that long. I guess you do have a pretty distinct voice.
Anyway, thanks for the video!
Awesome and hello Dave!
@@DaveRat Hello to you too. Stoked to geek out on a few more of your vids. Warning: I may have questions!
👍
Is it as big a difference with 100 feet? In practical listening terms...
The audibility of the differences on the direct signal is so small that it does not matter. This test magnifies the issues greatly.
The test is to show that cat5e cable is as good or better at transporting analog audio than audio snake
@@DaveRat appreciate your response and your tests!
Ironically I think Dave's mic audio could do with some HF loss. :)
I too am surprised there's more HF loss in the thicker audio cable. Glad I don't have to worry about that in my cat6 audio runs.
increased capacitance gives a HF shelving effect
Agreed and what is interesting is that the smaller diameter Cat cable with 4 channels performs equal or better than larger diameter single channel mic cable. One would think the Cat would have higher capacitance due to the closer proximity of the conductors, but.. .
Wait. The last test... You say the data cable is duller, which means that there is LESS high end frequency loss?! Did you just say that wrong? And unless you were also accidentally backwards on which was which, the second data cable was way quieter - losing more volume. So it would be worse for audio. Or did i miss something? I played it like 3 times. Maybe im an idiot
In the test we are listening to the loss. So a duller sound means less hf loss. A louder sound means more loss.
Full range loss is not a big deal as it just means the signal is a bit quieter but freq dependant loss that more highs are lost, means the signal will get duller, which is not ideal.
Well, hum, never use 100m câble...this review is right for pro users who make sound in larges venues. With 30 m snake, no serious loss with high quality stuff. Thank for your pertinent and usefull advices. Cheers
Yes, very much towards large format sound reinforcement. That said, also it may be useful to know that cat5e is useful and does not degrade signals when used for analog audio
@@DaveRat I hope to buy, if not high end one, a digital console with stagebox ( yamaha cl5 and rio racks, i can't afford for high end like big rental companies. Thank you
Dave, would love to see a loss and latency test between analogue over cat cable vs digital (like Dante)
Ive done audibility testing of analog vs digital for long cable runs over 100 meters and digital tends gains more and more advantages as cable length increases. For short runs, not flipping to digital has advantages
@@DaveRat Hi Dave, when you say short runs how much are you talking about? 20 meters?
Under 100 feet
Thanks Dave may we half some more please
Yep I've got more on the way
I use öhlin token ring data cabel to my XLR that realy opend the music Up
(ITs data cabel used on oilrigs)
I found that Meny of the XLR Cabels cut a Lot of top and buttom ...
Why are you saying the "duller" sound (Ethernet cable) is "*less* high frequency loss -- isn't it the opposite?
We are listening to the cancellation. We are hearing what is lost in the cable. So duller sound of the loss means less highs are lost in the cable. Meaning more highs make it through the cable.