1. Extra long cables will tend to attenuate the highest of the highs in some cases.

2. Poorly constructed shields (braided ground conductor) can allow noise to enter in.

I find the George L's to be highly desirable because they use a very tightly woven and braided ground (keeps noise to a minimum) AND they are so easy to "cut to length". In fact this feature makes them engenious, IMO.

As far as sound quality, I believe they are highly overated.

I'm surprised to hear this. I can ID George L's with my eyes closed in an A/B test. The highs are much clearer.

I too can tell a definate difference in sound using the George L cables. My highs are much cleaner.

I could never go back to other cables.

I like the GL's for steel, but for guitar they get all kinked up as I move around.

Do you have the small or large diameter? I agree on the small for guitar as far as a twisted mess

Pete B., congrats on the the Fender. Sounds fun. Maybe I'll get one too since I'm a Sneaky Pete/Ralph Mooney fan. If you're not gigging on August 20, drop by Mississippi Studios. I'll be playing there with some friends of mine.

Gonna order some red cables now. I'm gonna try both sizes.

Dave Z

[This message was edited by Dave Zirbel on 01 August 2004 at 07:19 AM.]

------------------

quote:

---

Steel players do it without fretting

---

http://www.waikiki-islanders.com

So the only two fidelity problems a guitar cable would have are:

1. Possible attenuation of ever higher audio frequencies.

2. Noise introducion into the signal stream.

Noise can be dealt with by the manner, shape and format of the shield (ground conductor). Plus, the security of the ground connections within the plug. (Assumes the plugs are of high quality)

Most quality cable manufacturers handle this pretty well by using a very tigthly woven braided shield. Some better, some not so better.

Distributed capacity is determined by the distance between the conductors; the size and material of the conductors, the type of dielectric (the material between the conductors); and of course, the length of the conductors. Note: even air can be considered a dieletric.

However, at audio frequencies this is a very minor problem in the realm of signal carrying conductors. For all practical purposes, there is little (if any) detectable attenuation of the highs, if the cable distances are kept under 10 feet in length. From ten to 20 feet, detectable audible roll off of the highest of the highs may be detected by some ears.

Beyond 20 feet (on a progressive scale) the highs will roll off more and more, and most can detect it. This is why telephone companies had to install "load coils" every so many miles to offset this dilemma, prior to digital. If they had not done this, gramma would NOT sound like gramma .

But we are talking about cables that are miles in length in this case.

Sound is soooo very subjective; and what muddies the water even more is the "eyes" play a major role in what we perceive, when it comes to sound. When you remove the eye's tremendous and overwhelming "bias", it would surprise even the most blessed of "ears".

It may make for good sales hype; it may make for "good ole boy" statements of "fact". But it will not stand a true test.

Georg L cables are a blessing to the guitarist, because of its genious in being able to "cut to length" and ease of adding plugs. Beyond that it is just another cable for all practical purposes.

If you truly believe that a George L cable is miles ahead of a Radio Shack guitar cable, or you believe it will make you sound like the next Buddy Emmons , buy that saspsucker and play to your heart's content.

But I assure you, you sound the same to the overwhelming majority of ears; especially when they can't see you and your equipment.

May Jesus richly bless you all,

quote:

---

For all practical purposes, there is little (if any) detectable attenuation of the highs, if the cable distances are kept under 10 feet in length.

---

Love ya Ernest, especially after meeting you in person last year, in the Excel booth at the ISGC, but we will respectfully agree to disagree on the word "big".

Note to all: the stats as stated above I stand on. If your claims pass a triple blind A/B test, let's talk. If at least two players can pass the test, I will sincerely and respectfully, stand corrected.

But I must tell you that a triple blind test is as close to being absolutely unforgiving as anyhing (worldly) I know of; and these tests have shot more than just a few theories right in the "quick". As well as the proverbial "this one is much better than that one" claim.

When a player can sit blindfolded; with both the installer; AND the tester being totally in the dark; as to which was A and/or B in all the A/B tests; and that player can pass the test 5 times in a row; then that player's claim can be considered truth.

If the player fails it a single time, it is not truth according to all who conduct triple blind tests. The facts are, players will fail time and time again almost every "sound" claim made about PSG's, and every accessory ever made for them. Perceived sound is THE most subjective of man's 5 senses.

(note: Emmons' P/P's sound excluded)

As stated, the eye can color sound pereption more than ANY other factor. When a player is blindfolded, it gives that player "revelations" bordering on what the late Ray Charles had.

And there are few who ever perceived, performed and played sound like Ray, IMO. His being blind IMO, was responsible for a very large part of his talents. Because it forced the honing of his ears to an incredible degree of perfection.

But even here, a triple blind test would quickly prove, or disprove the subjectivity (or lack thereof) of whatever Ray said concerning sound products. This would apply to any player of any instrument (or accessory) including the instrument named "voice" as in a singer.

Finally, if'n ya feels lack 'dem George L's make ya sound better than inuthin since sliced bread, go for it dear friends.

I love of 'em because of the ease of installing dem infernal connectors. So I buy em. But I won't bet the farm they produce better sound than any other quality cable.

Flame on,

I use both sizes of George L cable. I use the smaller size to go between pedals and I use the bigger size to get to my instrument. The bigger size cable isn't as prone to tangling up.

They sound the same.

The bigger size cable doesn't have a right angle option though

No cable can ever improve fidelity beyond what a given PU puts out. IE, the best it can do is to have a flat response. NO cable ever built has a flat response IF, the conductors are in relatively close proximity to each other. Which all guitar cables have.

However, the slight amount of high frequency attenution any guitar cable would have (at audio frequencies) is so small, that I stand on the stats I gave before.

The human ear is just toooo subjective to be used as a tester. We learn that in audio 101. When you have passed a triple blind test, talk to me.

Best we agree to disagree.

love you all,

Baz

------------------

quote:

---

Steel players do it without fretting

---

http://www.waikiki-islanders.com

At RCA's princeton labs in NJ, for years they ran triple blind tests on many facets of the audio industry. Such things as "monster cables", were among them.

In an overwhelming number of cases the the "claims' were never substantiated in the tests. In other words they failed just about every time. As stated earlier, sight has a tremendous affect on sound perception; particulary with respect to colors. But the one thing that ripped it asunder more than any other factor, was pre-conceived notions, including biases.

Also, while theory is indeed often contradicted, in no case has theory ever been proven wrong simply because ole "joe six pack" contracticted it.

There have been since time began a number of theories that have later been shot down. One such "theory" was that the earth was flat! But they were rarely ever shot down by good ole boy thinking. In the overwhelming number of cases the "facts" were proven incorrect by yet an even more knowledgable theorist.

One of these later "theorists" was of course Albert Einstein.

Ignorance may be bliss, but it is rarely (if ever) correct.