Audiophiles! What's the difference between mud, a banana and audio cables? Not a lot, actually...
· Creative Bloq
Share this article
0
Join the conversation
Follow us
Add us as a preferred source on Google
Newsletter
Get the Creative Bloq Newsletter
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Contact me with news and offers from other Future brands Receive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsors
By submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Want to add more newsletters?
Five times a week
CreativeBloq
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Signup +
Once a week
By Design
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Signup +
Once a week
State of the Art
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Signup +
Seasonal (around events)
Brand Impact Awards
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Signup +
An account already exists for this email address, please log in.
Subscribe to our newsletter
If you've ever agonised over which interconnect cables to buy for your audio setup (something I did not do for my first, budget audio set up), Michael Mardis has a green banana he'd like you to listen to.
Michael, a retired audio and video engineer and moderator on diyAudio.com, has spent the past decade proving a point that most cable manufacturers would rather you didn't hear.
His latest experiment is disarmingly simple. He recorded the same tracks through proper copper interconnects, then through 20cm of volcanic mud (he lives in the mountains of Central America), then through 13cm of unripe banana. And he then challenged listeners to tell them apart in a blind test.
Want to take the test? Grab one of the best budget audiophile headphones, then head here to listen to the test files. Pick a genre that you like, and see if you can tell the difference between the versions... I certainly couldn't!
You may like
I rate these budget-friendly in-ear monitors: Wired audiophile sound for less
High-end audio brand Final just released a $65 headphone, and I'm fascinated
Why audio brands need to stop selling the product
The setup is charmingly lo-fi. A Dell laptop running Reaper feeds audio out of an M-Audio Fast Track Pro interface, through the test material, and back in for recording. The mud sits in foil-lined baking trays; the bananas are probed with pennies soldered onto old mic cable. That's it.
The results speak for themselves
Despite the wildly different conductors — copper at near-zero resistance, mud at roughly 33kΩ, green banana at 5.1kΩ — Michael says the frequency response measurements came back virtually identical. "All but one measured ruler flat," he says. "One had a slight deviation from flat. I am hesitant to share that because it could be used to cheat on the test."
The principle is straightforward. Over short distances, even poor conductors can carry a line-level analogue signal without introducing enough resistance, capacitance or inductance to alter the frequency response (the sound you hear from your headphones) within the audible range of 20Hz to 20kHz. The voltages are small, the currents are tiny, and the distances are short. Physics doesn't care whether the conductor is refined copper or organic matter.
This is Michael's second attempt. He first ran audio through fruits, vegetables, beer and steel wool over a decade ago, but felt the methodology needed tightening. "The motivation for the redux was the nagging feeling for a decade that my first test could have been better," he says. "I tested too many materials, and many of the looped recordings had real noise floor problems." This time, foil shielding solved the noise issue, and he narrowed the test to three conductors.
One unplanned addition turned out to be crucial: including the original, non-looped recording as a fourth option. "It was later pointed out to me just how brilliant that was," Michael says. "If listeners can't tell the original from the loops, then the re-recording chain is above reproach."
Before you rip out your studio wiring and replace it with wet dirt, though, there are important caveats.
Get the Creative Bloq Newsletter
Sign up to Creative Bloq's daily newsletter, which brings you the latest news and inspiration from the worlds of art, design and technology.
Contact me with news and offers from other Future brandsReceive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsors
This test covers only short-run, line-level interconnects: the kind that are linking your interface to your monitors or your preamp to your recorder. Speaker cables are a different story: high-current applications demand proper gauge and low resistance, and a mud speaker cable would likely cause impedance mismatches or overheat an amplifier. Over longer runs (beyond about 10 metres), a cable's shielding and capacitance become measurable and potentially audible.
For creative professionals choosing interconnects for a typical desk setup, though, the takeaway is refreshingly simple. A well-made, properly shielded cable is all you need. The differences between a $10 cable and a $200 cable over a one-metre run are, this test suggests, roughly on par with the difference between copper and a banana.
Michael's test files remain available for anyone who wants to take the challenge themselves. So far, uptake has been modest. "I don't know why so few take the test," he says. "Perhaps they don't want to seem stupid if they get it wrong."
They needn't worry. That's rather the point.