Cable for Guitar & Speaker Cabinets

It seems to be a common theme these days.....:mad::mad:
When you cut off all domestic oil production "to save the planet" but then just buy it from someone else that's what happens! My food, oil, gasoline are all delivered by truck, raise the fuel price and everything goes UP UP UP.

I would LOVE to see the energy grid changed to hydrogen. The exhaust is water. There are normal gas stations that have had H added to their product line here in SoCal. But to make it economically feasible we need fusion energy. Getting there.

The first successful fusion reaction that created more energy than it took to make the reaction was 12.12.22.


Compared to the devils cocktail of toxicity created from EXPENDED lithium batteries??? And there is currently no plan to make facilities to dispose of them. And they are deadly poison and more flammable than gasoline.
 
My food, oil, gasoline are all delivered by truck, raise the fuel price and everything goes UP UP UP.
I have to say I notice it the most at the grocery store -- maybe it's because I go once a week and buy practically the same things every week, but my weekly grocery bill is about 60% higher than it was a year ago.

EDIT: My salary didn't go up 60%.
 
Just curious, do any Members here use Guitar Leads to connect the Amp to their Speaker Cab?
absolutely not.

I thought there was some reason speaker cables don't normally use a sheild and a separate parallel conductor is preferred. It escapes me at the moment...
it's my understanding that shielded / coaxial speaker cable is not necessary or good.
(as someone mentioned above, mains lamp cable would be better).

we're all aware of the various capacitances of instrument cables, which occurs due to the design/construction of the shielding around the signal conductor.
'shielded' /coaxial speaker cables are susceptible to the same thing.

"The shield will increase the capacitative load of the speaker cables on the amp ... and some amps become unstable (and go into oscillation) with a high capacitative load."

"One potential danger of coaxial wire is the capacitance. If cable is long and the power amp section uses a lot of negative feedback, then you can push the amp towards instability. Solid-state amps tend to be worse in this case"
 
The shield will increase the capacitative load of the speaker cables on the amp ... and some amps become unstable (and go into oscillation) with a high capacitative load.
This is true, and keep in mind that speaker cable isn't like instrument cable in the sense that it is already carrying a signal that is going to be amplified by a circuit -- with a speaker cable, what is on that cable is what you have. With an instrument cable, you're plugging that into a circuit that will amplify any noise you introduce on the line. With a speaker cable, the biggest risk you have is introducing rf across a long cable (but you're not amplifying it).

Shielding isn't nearly as important for a speaker cable as it is for an instrument cable. The most important factors for a speaker cable are capacitive load which affects impedance. That is precisely why you should never connect your speaker to your amp using an instrument cable.
 
This is true, and keep in mind that speaker cable isn't like instrument cable in the sense that it is already carrying a signal that is going to be amplified by a circuit -- with a speaker cable, what is on that cable is what you have. With an instrument cable, you're plugging that into a circuit that will amplify an noise you introduce on the line. With a speaker cable, the biggest risk you have is introducing rf across a long cable (but you're not amplifying it).

Shielding isn't nearly as important for a speaker cable as it is for an instrument cable. The most important factors for a speaker cable are capacitive load which affects impedance. That is precisely why you should never connect your speaker to your amp using an instrument cable.
I know I made the mistake of using a guitar cable as a speaker cable one time in my life. Cable burned out, the HT fuse in my amp blew and the output jack arc’d a fireball out the back that left a black spot on my wall.
 
I know I made the mistake of using a guitar cable as a speaker cable one time in my life. Cable burned out, the HT fuse in my amp blew and the output jack arc’d a fireball out the back that left a black spot on my wall.
I actually had to do the opposite once. Didn't have an instrument cable to plug in my bass, but I did have a speaker cable, which worked, but not exactly ideal. I think I got lucky that I was in a low rf environment.
 
absolutely not.


it's my understanding that shielded / coaxial speaker cable is not necessary or good.
(as someone mentioned above, mains lamp cable would be better).

we're all aware of the various capacitances of instrument cables, which occurs due to the design/construction of the shielding around the signal conductor.
'shielded' /coaxial speaker cables are susceptible to the same thing.

"The shield will increase the capacitative load of the speaker cables on the amp ... and some amps become unstable (and go into oscillation) with a high capacitative load."

"One potential danger of coaxial wire is the capacitance. If cable is long and the power amp section uses a lot of negative feedback, then you can push the amp towards instability. Solid-state amps tend to be worse in this case"
That's one side, you wouldn't want to run your speakers 100ft, that's for sure. But for the 2' you need for a head cab it's ok.
This is their logic and specs. I swear the ground is thicker than 12ga when you gather it together....

"studio" cable. As in you want as little bleed from the speaker cable as possible to prevent it from inducting into all that expensive equipment.
 
I have to say I notice it the most at the grocery store -- maybe it's because I go once a week and buy practically the same things every week, but my weekly grocery bill is about 60% higher than it was a year ago.

EDIT: My salary didn't go up 60%.

Since I'm retired I get a cost of living increase refereed to as C.O.L.A. My cola this year should have been 60%. It was 3.2%. This is pure dishonest thievery.....

1712018133733.png
 
That's one side, you wouldn't want to run your speakers 100ft, that's for sure. But for the 2' you need for a head cab it's ok.
This is their logic and specs. I swear the ground is thicker than 12ga when you gather it together....

"studio" cable. As in you want as little bleed from the speaker cable as possible to prevent it from inducting into all that expensive equipment.
we're not really comparing apples with apples in this discussion.

these shielded speaker cables appear to be intended for studio speakers / monitors, where that kind of fidelity sort of matters - perhaps if you were in a room susceptible to RF noise and the regular speaker cables aren't cutting it.

also, idk about you, but i've got a feeling that a guitar tube amp is gonna pump a lot more current into 12" guitar speakers (especially if its playing at band volume), verses a pair of NS-10s fed by a SS poweramp at listening levels.

2' or 100' - i would never waste my time or risk my amps with shielded cables for guitar speakers.
 
we're not really comparing apples with apples in this discussion.

these shielded speaker cables appear to be intended for studio speakers / monitors, where that kind of fidelity sort of matters - perhaps if you were in a room susceptible to RF noise and the regular speaker cables aren't cutting it.

also, idk about you, but i've got a feeling that a guitar tube amp is gonna pump a lot more current into 12" guitar speakers (especially if its playing at band volume), verses a pair of NS-10s fed by a SS poweramp at listening levels.

2' or 100' - i would never waste my time or risk my amps with shielded cables for guitar speakers.
Used close to 50' over the past 20 years, nothing but fantastic results.
 
Shielded AC cable doesn't make sense to me if one of the 2 legs are the shield. That's like the cheap pickups that have 1 wire and a shield.
The capacitance between the two would be a concern for me. Opposite polarities with an insulator between them sounds familiar.
It's not really a shield because it's not going to ground. It's just encasing one polarity in another which is generally frowned upon.
I'd be concerned about puncture issues as well.
As with all things, if it works for you, go for it. But nothing in would seek out.
I think I recall some mogami along these lines but it was recommended for live use where cabinet cables ran along HV cables. Not fixing anything, just making a bad scenario less badder. But it's been a while...
I've also used extension cord speaker cables, so there's that. Hundred ways to Detroit.
 
When you cut off all domestic oil production "to save the planet" but then just buy it from someone else that's what happens! My food, oil, gasoline are all delivered by truck, raise the fuel price and everything goes UP UP UP.
I have to say I notice it the most at the grocery store -- maybe it's because I go once a week and buy practically the same things every week, but my weekly grocery bill is about 60% higher than it was a year ago.

I'm not defending the price increases we've all experienced, but just want to point out something important that gets overlooked. Notice that prices have gone up in EVERY country in the world by more or less the same %. Thus the inflation CANNOT be due to the policies of any SINGLE COUNTRY. Such world-wide inflation can only be arise from impacts that are so large that they impact the GLOBAL economy.

So think about what has happened in the last 3-4 years, and then recognize the scale of what has transpired. Let's just consider the top two origins of the recent inflation.
  • We had major supply chain disruption from COVID, plus motion of some supply chains out of China for political & national security reasons,
  • and last but not least the Russian war in Ukraine.
We all have heard of the "economic law of supply & demand", it's basic stuff - and it happened in spades w/ both of these issues.

Almost every product you can think of has an international supply chain these days. Disrupt even just one part of that chain and the product is impacted. Heard of 'just in time' inventory? That was driven by companies like Toyota in 1980/1990s, and was adopted around the world as good economic policy - maximizing production, lowering costs. It helped keep inflation low in the last 2+ decades. But hhat we just experienced showed how brittle that approach can be, unfortunately. Note by the way that it was a corporate/economic concept, not a government policy. Supply chain impacts have largely been resolved by the end of 2023, and inflation rates have come down significantly as a result. National inflation indices peaked at anywhere from ~8-12% around the globe, and are now generally between 3-7%. (If you look at the the numbers re: peak inflation rate and today's rate, the US has done better than most countries, actually.)

And moving supply chains out of China for national reasons also contributes to price increases, because it costs more to make stuff almost everywhere else (i.e., low cost was generally a major reason why it was in China in the first place). This item is clearly continuing.

Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine continues in 2024 - and with it the following inflation impacts:

The USSR was/is a huge oil & gas supplier. Europe was extremely dependent on cheap Russian gas for electricity & chemical production, and Russian oil for energy + transportation. Shifting all of Europe to other oil/gas suppliers tightened the supply throughout the rest of the western world, driving up prices - which we all know hits almost everything. Oil is a global commodity. No western country has shut off oil & gas production or consumption in 2020-2024, in fact globally it's increased during that period (including production & consumption in the US).

The Ukraine was a huge global supplier of wheat/grain and the dominant supplier of low-cost potash fertilizer. A shortage of low-cost fertilizer necessitates moving to more expensive fertilizer, which hits almost all agriculture world-wide - produce as well as meat. Developed countries could at least pay the higher wheat & fertilizer prices, but poorer countries are experiencing far worse impacts - severe shortages, hunger, etc.

These were huge global impacts which happened at the same time. And on top of that, once prices start going up, there's a subset of producers/suppliers/retailers that hike their prices even more because they think they can get away with it - which is not nice (it's called gouging for a reason), but unfortunately there's not that many laws against it and even then it's very difficult and time-consuming to prove in a court of law. In capitalism, the usual notion is that competition will ultimately address it. I'm waiting on that one, too.

So I totally understand the anger and frustration, but at least properly appreciate and understand the economic origin of what transpired.
 
I'm not defending the price increases we've all experienced, but just want to point out something important that gets overlooked. Notice that prices have gone up in EVERY country in the world by more or less the same %. Thus the inflation CANNOT be due to the policies of any SINGLE COUNTRY. Such world-wide inflation can only be arise from impacts that are so large that they impact the GLOBAL economy.

So think about what has happened in the last 3-4 years, and then recognize the scale of what has transpired. Let's just consider the top two origins of the recent inflation.
  • We had major supply chain disruption from COVID, plus motion of some supply chains out of China for political & national security reasons,
  • and last but not least the Russian war in Ukraine.
We all have heard of the "economic law of supply & demand", it's basic stuff - and it happened in spades w/ both of these issues.

Almost every product you can think of has an international supply chain these days. Disrupt even just one part of that chain and the product is impacted. Heard of 'just in time' inventory? That was driven by companies like Toyota in 1980/1990s, and was adopted around the world as good economic policy - maximizing production, lowering costs. It helped keep inflation low in the last 2+ decades. But hhat we just experienced showed how brittle that approach can be, unfortunately. Note by the way that it was a corporate/economic concept, not a government policy. Supply chain impacts have largely been resolved by the end of 2023, and inflation rates have come down significantly as a result. National inflation indices peaked at anywhere from ~8-12% around the globe, and are now generally between 3-7%. (If you look at the the numbers re: peak inflation rate and today's rate, the US has done better than most countries, actually.)

And moving supply chains out of China for national reasons also contributes to price increases, because it costs more to make stuff almost everywhere else (i.e., low cost was generally a major reason why it was in China in the first place). This item is clearly continuing.

Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine continues in 2024 - and with it the following inflation impacts:

The USSR was/is a huge oil & gas supplier. Europe was extremely dependent on cheap Russian gas for electricity & chemical production, and Russian oil for energy + transportation. Shifting all of Europe to other oil/gas suppliers tightened the supply throughout the rest of the western world, driving up prices - which we all know hits almost everything. Oil is a global commodity. No western country has shut off oil & gas production or consumption in 2020-2024, in fact globally it's increased during that period (including production & consumption in the US).

The Ukraine was a huge global supplier of wheat/grain and the dominant supplier of low-cost potash fertilizer. A shortage of low-cost fertilizer necessitates moving to more expensive fertilizer, which hits almost all agriculture world-wide - produce as well as meat. Developed countries could at least pay the higher wheat & fertilizer prices, but poorer countries are experiencing far worse impacts - severe shortages, hunger, etc.

These were huge global impacts which happened at the same time. And on top of that, once prices start going up, there's a subset of producers/suppliers/retailers that hike their prices even more because they think they can get away with it - which is not nice (it's called gouging for a reason), but unfortunately there's not that many laws against it and even then it's very difficult and time-consuming to prove in a court of law. In capitalism, the usual notion is that competition will ultimately address it. I'm waiting on that one, too.

So I totally understand the anger and frustration, but at least properly appreciate and understand the economic origin of what transpired.
Most countries use the dollar standard. I was around for the first time when Carter did the exact same thing with the same results worldwide.
 
I'm not defending the price increases we've all experienced, but just want to point out something important that gets overlooked. Notice that prices have gone up in EVERY country in the world by more or less the same %. Thus the inflation CANNOT be due to the policies of any SINGLE COUNTRY. Such world-wide inflation can only be arise from impacts that are so large that they impact the GLOBAL economy.

So think about what has happened in the last 3-4 years, and then recognize the scale of what has transpired. Let's just consider the top two origins of the recent inflation.
  • We had major supply chain disruption from COVID, plus motion of some supply chains out of China for political & national security reasons,
  • and last but not least the Russian war in Ukraine.
We all have heard of the "economic law of supply & demand", it's basic stuff - and it happened in spades w/ both of these issues.

Almost every product you can think of has an international supply chain these days. Disrupt even just one part of that chain and the product is impacted. Heard of 'just in time' inventory? That was driven by companies like Toyota in 1980/1990s, and was adopted around the world as good economic policy - maximizing production, lowering costs. It helped keep inflation low in the last 2+ decades. But hhat we just experienced showed how brittle that approach can be, unfortunately. Note by the way that it was a corporate/economic concept, not a government policy. Supply chain impacts have largely been resolved by the end of 2023, and inflation rates have come down significantly as a result. National inflation indices peaked at anywhere from ~8-12% around the globe, and are now generally between 3-7%. (If you look at the the numbers re: peak inflation rate and today's rate, the US has done better than most countries, actually.)

And moving supply chains out of China for national reasons also contributes to price increases, because it costs more to make stuff almost everywhere else (i.e., low cost was generally a major reason why it was in China in the first place). This item is clearly continuing.

Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine continues in 2024 - and with it the following inflation impacts:

The USSR was/is a huge oil & gas supplier. Europe was extremely dependent on cheap Russian gas for electricity & chemical production, and Russian oil for energy + transportation. Shifting all of Europe to other oil/gas suppliers tightened the supply throughout the rest of the western world, driving up prices - which we all know hits almost everything. Oil is a global commodity. No western country has shut off oil & gas production or consumption in 2020-2024, in fact globally it's increased during that period (including production & consumption in the US).

The Ukraine was a huge global supplier of wheat/grain and the dominant supplier of low-cost potash fertilizer. A shortage of low-cost fertilizer necessitates moving to more expensive fertilizer, which hits almost all agriculture world-wide - produce as well as meat. Developed countries could at least pay the higher wheat & fertilizer prices, but poorer countries are experiencing far worse impacts - severe shortages, hunger, etc.

These were huge global impacts which happened at the same time. And on top of that, once prices start going up, there's a subset of producers/suppliers/retailers that hike their prices even more because they think they can get away with it - which is not nice (it's called gouging for a reason), but unfortunately there's not that many laws against it and even then it's very difficult and time-consuming to prove in a court of law. In capitalism, the usual notion is that competition will ultimately address it. I'm waiting on that one, too.

So I totally understand the anger and frustration, but at least properly appreciate and understand the economic origin of what transpired.
It occurred to me my answer may not have made sense to anyone that doesn't understand macroeconomics.

Inflation means the amount of material that a dollar can purchase declines. Since other nations use the dollar standard that means the amount of their purchase declines as well.

If a mythical currency called the platoid was worth 2.2 dollars, and the value of the dollar declines that means the platoid can also only purchase 2.2 dollars worth, which is less than it used to be.

This is referred to as "the dollar standard" and why inflation in the world is tied to the dollar.
 
I don't want to get too political here, but I think that at the time it was clear to alot of people what the consequences of not raising interest rates would be. It's economics 101. The Fed is in control of the balancing act and Teflon Don publicly bullied/shamed/villified them/Powell to not raise interest rates when they clearly should have. This stuff was all over the media back then.





And he's doing it again now too
 
Most countries use the dollar standard. I was around for the first time when Carter did the exact same thing with the same results worldwide
I was around back then as well, and the 70s inflation was again triggered by a huge global impact coming from OPEC manipulating the global price of oil, ~tripling its price practically overnight - which impacted all countries that imported oil (and other items whose price was impacted by oil prices). OPEC then had a controlling/majority share of global production - no longer true today. 70s global inflation did not originate from US actions, the breakdown of Bretton Woods, etc. Then as well as now, the US is something like ~1/4 of the global GDP - so while the US has a very strong national economy (especially on a per capita basis), we don't dominate the global GDP.

You manifestly misconstrue the impact of the dollar being a global currency, no large developed country would accept using US$ for international trade if it meant mandatory acceptance of a ~10% annual inflation shock. There are so many financial ways to avoid such externally-driven shocks - e.g., trade in their own currency, make use of currency hedges, etc. If what you say was true, right now European political leaders (+ many others) would be blaming the US about their recent inflation on a daily basis.

Added comment:
SUMMARY: The global inflation in 2020-2024 (as well as in the 1970s) was NOT due to either (1) US government policy or actions, or (2) the US $ being the global reserve currency. It was due to events outside US control that had broad global impacts - e.g., in 2020's it was COVID, it's impacts on transportation (especially international shipping) and supply chains, and by Russia attack on the Ukraine. In the 1970s, it was OPEC's almost tripling of their oil price at a time when they dominated the world oil supply.
 
Last edited:
I thought there was some reason speaker cables don't normally use a sheild and a separate parallel conductor is preferred. It escapes me at the moment...
It's cheaper, easier to prep/terminate, and there's simply no need for a shield. Amps have near zero output impedance, and speakers are also very low Z, so any little interference the speaker cable might pick would get immediately shorted out. As for the other way around, the emissions radiated by a speaker cable into nearby stuff are mosly of an electromagnetic nature (as opposed to electrostatic) due to the high current going through the cable. You can't shield magnetic fields with copper, they go right through.

I work in the pro audio world, I've done and/or witnessed immense amounts of wiring over the years, and it's almost never Mogami. The one thing special about Mogami is that it they make it very flexible, mostly because they use spiral shields, which is not something we normally want in the studios. Spiral shields don't withstand repeated handling/flexing as well as braid shields - they bulge up and come undone. As for fixed wiring, which is the bulk of what's in the walls and under the floor of a studio or concert hall, foil shield is both cheaper and better (100% shield coverage) than both braid and spiral.
 
I'm not defending the price increases we've all experienced, but just want to point out something important that gets overlooked. Notice that prices have gone up in EVERY country in the world by more or less the same %. Thus the inflation CANNOT be due to the policies of any SINGLE COUNTRY. Such world-wide inflation can only be arise from impacts that are so large that they impact the GLOBAL economy.

So think about what has happened in the last 3-4 years, and then recognize the scale of what has transpired. Let's just consider the top two origins of the recent inflation.
  • We had major supply chain disruption from COVID, plus motion of some supply chains out of China for political & national security reasons,
  • and last but not least the Russian war in Ukraine.
We all have heard of the "economic law of supply & demand", it's basic stuff - and it happened in spades w/ both of these issues.

Almost every product you can think of has an international supply chain these days. Disrupt even just one part of that chain and the product is impacted. Heard of 'just in time' inventory? That was driven by companies like Toyota in 1980/1990s, and was adopted around the world as good economic policy - maximizing production, lowering costs. It helped keep inflation low in the last 2+ decades. But hhat we just experienced showed how brittle that approach can be, unfortunately. Note by the way that it was a corporate/economic concept, not a government policy. Supply chain impacts have largely been resolved by the end of 2023, and inflation rates have come down significantly as a result. National inflation indices peaked at anywhere from ~8-12% around the globe, and are now generally between 3-7%. (If you look at the the numbers re: peak inflation rate and today's rate, the US has done better than most countries, actually.)

And moving supply chains out of China for national reasons also contributes to price increases, because it costs more to make stuff almost everywhere else (i.e., low cost was generally a major reason why it was in China in the first place). This item is clearly continuing.

Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine continues in 2024 - and with it the following inflation impacts:

The USSR was/is a huge oil & gas supplier. Europe was extremely dependent on cheap Russian gas for electricity & chemical production, and Russian oil for energy + transportation. Shifting all of Europe to other oil/gas suppliers tightened the supply throughout the rest of the western world, driving up prices - which we all know hits almost everything. Oil is a global commodity. No western country has shut off oil & gas production or consumption in 2020-2024, in fact globally it's increased during that period (including production & consumption in the US).

The Ukraine was a huge global supplier of wheat/grain and the dominant supplier of low-cost potash fertilizer. A shortage of low-cost fertilizer necessitates moving to more expensive fertilizer, which hits almost all agriculture world-wide - produce as well as meat. Developed countries could at least pay the higher wheat & fertilizer prices, but poorer countries are experiencing far worse impacts - severe shortages, hunger, etc.

These were huge global impacts which happened at the same time. And on top of that, once prices start going up, there's a subset of producers/suppliers/retailers that hike their prices even more because they think they can get away with it - which is not nice (it's called gouging for a reason), but unfortunately there's not that many laws against it and even then it's very difficult and time-consuming to prove in a court of law. In capitalism, the usual notion is that competition will ultimately address it. I'm waiting on that one, too.

So I totally understand the anger and frustration, but at least properly appreciate and understand the economic origin of what transpired.
Yeah, I wasn't trying to get political or associate a particular cause to any of this. I was just saying that I have witnessed prices going up. I know there is a whole geo-political tapestry underpinning it, but I wasn't trying to get into all of that. I was just saying that my wallet is hurting lately.
 
Back
Top