Posted by: "Scott Fraser"
> I can corroborate the urban interference portion of this. Many years
> ago I too was using Canare StarQuad as a stereo pair. I eventually
> tracked down some occasional, yet persistent, RF problems to the use
> of this cable in a 100' length with transformerless Neumann KM140s in =
> certain concert halls. There were no issues with the transformer
> equipped Neumann KM84s. I have since switched to Mogami 2 pair for
> all stereo uses & there has never been a recurrence of the RF
> problem, regardless of microphone type. The Mogami 2 pair is thicker
> than StarQuad, yet much more flexible.
> Personally, I would not use StarQuad wired in this fashion with any
> transformerless mic, because I don't think there is any part of the
> planet which is out of reach of the VLF & short wave portion of the
> radio spectrum.
I cannot comment on Neumann mics as I don't use them. I've not had
problems using stereo with Canare StarQuad in either diameter with MKH
mics or the Telinga. (the telinga itself is not well shielded, however)
I started using it after experiencing Lang Elliott's recording style. He
uses long runs of StarQuad in the smaller diameter made up as stereo to
set his mics close to his subjects. I've used runs as long as 450' with
no problems. But for nature recording. Since I don't do studio or
concert hall recording with such cable, or at all for that matter, I
have no problems.
Canare does make a two channel snake cable for those that want to
preserve the full technical noise resistance of the cable. It is larger
than standard StarQuad. Originally I was going to use this, and bought a
length of it, but Lang's experience convinced me to try doing stereo
with the regular cable. Two channel star quad from anybody will be too
big to cram into the boot of the Neutric 5 pin XLR's, you will have to
strip off the outer protective cover, thus compromising the waterproof
design. That's definitely a consideration for folks like me as I'm often
recording in swamps and such like. You will have to terminate the snake
in two 3 pin waterproof XLR's and figure out a way to reseal the
stripped cover to use the snake. Even then, it won't be as mechanically
strong. I do use the inner conductors stripped from the snake cable for
my Y adapters. The Y adapters are not exposed to wet like the cable is.
Though I have drowned a Y adapter attached to the SASS out up to the top
of my boots recording one night. Had to climb out and get a spare, the
wet one was ok once dried out. I've thought of putting a direct 5 pin
plugin on the back of the SASS to eliminate this problem.
Remember, this is naturerecordists, we record out well away from any
direct sources of strong emf and even using the starquad as stereo you
have only brought it's shielding down to the level of ordinary mic
cable. There is still a high quality braided shield and the balanced
system to protect the signal. About the only thing I run into is
recording under high tension power lines. The field around those will be
picked up by not only the cables, but the recorder and mics, it's a very
strong field. Obviously if you are a studio/concert hall/city recordist
as well as a nature recordist you will either have to have two sets of
cable, or put up with the extra bulk and weight of the cable as it was
designed. If it were me, I'd go the route of a separate set for nature
recording. All the two channel snakes are large, and stringing two
separate cable lengths much more of a problem than one. Think of
stringing your connection several hundred feet through brush and swamps.
Handheld with two cables instead of one is definitely annoying, I've
done that. Never tried the bulky snake cable in the short handheld length.
Walt
|