home made speaker cable vs. the big boys

Before they start to even think of cable inprovements they need to stop over mikeing and over mixing. That's where all the resolution is lost. And compressing doesn't help either. These studios are concerned about the final sound but are by no means purists. They still have to make the general public happy so you'll be hard pressed to find a studio that is audiophile correct to the last detail or even close to that when you really nit pick it.

I agree with that, Kacz! Pop music is about what will sound good in a convertible at 90 mph, and always will be. Whatever sounds best to those who primarily listen this way is what wins Grammys...

Ludwig chose Transparent because he was paid to endorse it. And being the wizard he is, Ludwig can polish a recording to sound the way he envisions or "hears" it to be when he undertakes the project. There is no magic in wire but there is magic in his mastering and mixing. He would turn out the same product using Rat Shack or Transparent, because he is talented and never loses focus on what he wants the final product to sound like. He just doesn't take the money and run. He is an artist in his own right and a perfectionist. The digital bits and bytes are transported down the wire, Transparent or Rat Shack, uncorrupted. It is what he does after the data is stored that is the pure mastery of his production. If you understand anything about algorithms and how digital data can be manipulated to do just about anything you want it to do (or how you want it to sound), you know this to be true.

I would think that if they where paying him that you would at least see him in a add. This was just an interview.Do you think he is also being paid by Eggleston Works? I just don't believe that this would be a very good way of promoting your product. Just allot of industry people watching you, not really to many audiophiles. When was the last time he was interwiewed by Stereophile? I can see him getting them free but I do not know about being on the payroll. But then again I do not own a studio.

It is never by accident that somebody mentions a product by name...... More often than not the marketing people use the information to their best advantage. You may never see what they do but within the industry that information is used to promote their product. At dealer meetings,at trade shows, on road trips, etc. they use that information and they pass it along to dealers who use it to promote their products to the end user. Eggleston probably put their products into that studio at pennies on the dollar, just like Transparent did. That's what makes the world go 'round. Not saying that the products don't have quality - they certainely do. But a deal is always cut and the marketing people know that they can count on the studio (or producer or whomever) to mention their names at strategic times. And the deal is usually implied, not implicit. Just think if you were in that position - some company came into your studio, you were updating older equipment, and they offered incredible deals to displace a competing product. You agreed that their product was as good (not necessarily better) as the older brand name product - or if you were building a new studio and you got deals on everything you could to keep your costs low without compromising quality - not necessarily making better sound but making equivalent sound on a lower budget. If you were a good businessman you would do the same thing. But what goes around comes around. Quid Pro Quo. Ain't the cable that makes the recording - it's the producer/engineer team plus the budget the record company gives them to work with. And the sophistication of their software. It is just business and profit margin. Nothing else.