Current recording engineers - what cables used?


Two sets of questions for currently active recording engineers participating on this forum:

1) what cables are you using for power supply and low level signals in your recording studio? What is the overriding factor in this decision - cost, durability/reliability or performance? If higher quality is desired in certain applications, where and why? If these are trade secrets, tell us anyway :-)

2) what cables are you using in your home system, if you have one, and do you consider yourself an “audiophile”? What is the overriding factor in this decision - cost, durability/reliability or performance?

Some aftermarket suppliers of audiophile cables boast that their products are used in pro studios.  Others posting here have suggested that use has more to do with durability than exotic design and performance.  This makes no sense to me because I have build bullet proof power cables with hardware store parts at low cost that could be dragged through hell and work for years, but did not come close to more exotic design in terms of audio performance in my systems.

I would assume this forum focused on audiophile home gear might select for recording professionals that are more informed on the audiophile cable “market” and have more developed opinions on this, and so do not represent a general crossection of the pro industry.  But had to ask anyway.
Ag insider logo xs@2xknownothing
It's nice and appreciated to hear from engineers on these threads. Now, whenever someone chimes in and says they've been to a studio and all they use is cheap cabling, we can take it with a grain of salt. That old saw should finally be laid to rest but mark my words, it will surface on a regular basis now and again. 

All the best,
Nonoise
This may go down as one of the most important threads in Agon history. No, I'm not being sarcastic. Hearing from engineers who respect the potential for the impact of cabling may finally quiet some of the naysayers who have been plaguing cable enthusiasts for years. 

What we are seeing here is further evidence of what I have asserted for along time - money rules the discussion. The budget constrained audiophiles at home insist that cables make little difference, while budget constrained engineers are forced, even when they think otherwise, to opt for low cost cabling. IOW, the wallet dictates a LOT of discussion on this topic, not necessarily experience (excepting our two engineers), or performance. 

Obviously, most would agree with the principle that what is upstream in a studio is considered of more critical importance. It is largely accepted also that what is lost upstream in a HiFi rig cannot be recovered (That is not to say it cannot be substituted). It seems budget is the primary impediment to better cabling being used, not a disdain for what cabling can do when improved. 

I predict these cordial, informative engineers who are branching out into better home HiFi will find over time that the overall significance of cabling in the home system is much different than in the studio (I'm not saying in an absolute sense that cabling would be less important in that environment, only that it seems not to be explored much at this point). While a perceived 10X difference may exist in studio between mic and cables, in my experience building hundreds of HiFi systems that extreme of a disparity does not exist in home setups between components and cables. I have many, many times yielded as strong/noticeable a change in systems with a loom of cables as with any component, i.e. amp, preamp, source. So, as shocking as this may seem to the engineers, my ratio of potential sonic benefit from a loom of cables to a component is... 1 to 1, yielding every bit as much performance change as a component! My guess is they may scoff at that comment, until they spend more time with looms of cables in home systems. Then, they will see that I am correct. It's a very different ball game. 

I look forward to continued input from recording engineers at this site. Thank you for your informative and helpful comments! 
I would agree that the keys to recording music are the artist, room, and microphone choices as the main influences on the final sound - but, there is an entire chain that effects sound far beyond something like cabling.

What you have to understand about making a final recorded product is that the sound goes through so many processes to get to a final recording, that cabling adds or detracts marginally in the final product.

Today, you choose how you're going to record (analog or digitally) and then plan the entire processes based on the original recording format.  Few recordings are made analog anymore, but you have a few people, like T Bone Burnett, who use tape for specific projects (New Basement Tapes as an example). 

A friend owns a 48 track studio (48 in, 48 out, with 6 side channels) and what he is interested in is the lowest noise through the entire system.  He uses high quality, balanced line cords throughout the system. 

The first choice you make is the microphone as the microphone response curve and characteristic can shape the sound at the source.  There are real sound differences between something like a Shure 57 and a Telefunken ELA M251.  With some microphones you can change patterns and that has an effect on the sound as you can choose to incorporate room acoustics or exclude them.

Recording digitally is a process choice in itself.  What type of digitizer, bit rate, compressor (digital plug-in or hardware), reverb (digital plug-in, or hardware), editing software, etc. 

After recording, the raw recorded audio has to be mastered - and then the sound is going through a completely different system including the mixing board, amplifiers, compressor / limiters, etc. 

One of the last considerations is what is the final format?  MP3, CD, SACD, etc?  That choice may drive all of the other choices made from the beginning of the recording process.   

Then you have the music reproduction system it's going to be played through - which has its own effect on the sound. 

If you think about how many times the sound has been handled, all of the different equipment its gone through and take all of that into consideration, any effect cabling has, beyond being neutral and low noise, is marginal at best.







 
Agreed. The advice here is excellent. In summary, component equipment is so much more important than cables. Not to say good cables are not important at all, as a good connection and good shielding can really help and low capacitance becomes important for long runs (studios have much longer runs than consumers). Mogami and Canare make excellent but expensive XLR cables.

Of course microphone cables are orders of magnitude more important than line-level interconnects simply because the signal level is soooo small. XLR becomes critical for microphones. And just as Blue Jeans say - if your digital cable works well (no dropouts) then there is NOTHING you can do to improve a digital signal. No such thing as a rounder 0 or a sharper 1 with digital.
mok, charlienyc, and buckhorn_cortez, thanks for your contributions. Great to get perspective from the folks who are recording the music that we try so hard to reproduce faithfully.  Some comments based on your input:

1. There are a lot more variables in recording than playback, and how those variables are addressed in the studio have  much greater consequences than in playback because they’re essentially permanent.

2. Cost is a constant overidding factor in decisions about what gear to get and where to invest limited resources in a studio, and cables are a consideration, but not the first consideration for any contributors here.

3. That said, quality cables are recognized as valuable.

4. It is interesting that the musicians and the microphones are listed as especially critical parts of the recording chain, paralleling the “source first” philosophy in some hifi playback quarters.

5. The relative importance of ADC’s parallels the focus of some in the playback side on good DACs.

Thanks again, appreciate all input here.