Kniferide wrote:

llllllllllllllllllll wrote: Mon Jul 07, 2025 4:47 pm Tell me if I am making this too complicated - I want to run an instrument level signal far away. I have two EA DIs (that reamp) and a Redco xlr to Cat 6 sender and receiver.

Example:

Control room:
Guitar > effects and what have you > EA DI > long xlr to cat6 extender >
Cat6 cable running downstairs >
Cat6 receiver to xlr > EA DI > amp

I generally need to be standing next to the amp I’m playing through for the illegal magic to happen, but this sounds like something I could use from time to time, just making sure I’m not overcomplicating it.

It might have a lot of signal loss through those 2 transformers. Dunno though. I have 2 sets of TC Electronics Teleports. They have a transmit and receiver side (sold separately, about $30 each) and are basically active instrument extenders that are buffered. They have worked well for me sending shit to guitar amps in the other room over xlr and are the most affordable way I have found to do it. I have used the to reap as well and it worked. I thik they are discontinued cause I can only seem to find them on bullshit Amazon. Remember you gotta have the GLR AND GLT sind for them to work.

https://www.amazon.com/TC-Electronic-GL ... &hvexpln=0

Greg wrote: Mon Jul 14, 2025 5:02 pm The cable length wouldn't be a problem. CAT5 is an unshielded cable, so you'd probably run into noise issues. Think of it in the same way you'd send a microphone signal (since it's basically the same after the stepdown of the first transformer). You wouldn't want to use CAT5 cable for a mic snake.
The two passive DIs used as an instrument extension tool through mic lines is done pretty regularly. Not the most perfectly transparent process, but it works.
Radial makes a good two box tool for that purpose too. It's powered, and pretty much dedicated (at least 1/2) to just one use.

Kniferide wrote:

Greg wrote: Mon Jul 14, 2025 5:02 pm The cable length wouldn't be a problem. CAT5 is an unshielded cable, so you'd probably run into noise issues. Think of it in the same way you'd send a microphone signal (since it's basically the same after the stepdown of the first transformer). You wouldn't want to use CAT5 cable for a mic snake.
The two passive DIs used as an instrument extension tool through mic lines is done pretty regularly. Not the most perfectly transparent process, but it works.
Radial makes a good two box tool for that purpose too. It's powered, and pretty much dedicated (at least 1/2) to just one use.

Not that I have any footing to argue with Greg, but using shielded Cat5 for mic and line signals is a pretty standard and often seen thing these days. We do it all over the place out here at ShoeTown USA, Does infact need to be shielded Cat5 and Ethercon is preferred, but not a necessity, it just gives it a better locking connection. MUST use shielded Cat connectors AND Shielded CAT cable. 5 and 6 are within spec. Being that all 4 pairs will share shield you could get noise across the pairs, but that is no different in an xlr box where the connectors are connected to the chassis. I've run line, and mic with phantom power down Grounded Cat5e with zero issues at all. Well over 100'.

Dave Rat, of RHCP fame ( so you know he is fucking serious) makes snakes and boxes for it and you can buy cheap ones on Amazon and shit.

https://soundtools.com/products

Greg wrote: Being a cheapskate, I've seen/heard the difference between super cheap cables, and, say, Canare Star-quad cables (and their equivalents) for mic level stuff. I'm a convert, grudgingly. Same goes with mulit-pair snakes.

Greg wrote: Mon Jul 14, 2025 7:01 pm

Kniferide wrote:

Greg wrote: Mon Jul 14, 2025 5:02 pm The cable length wouldn't be a problem. CAT5 is an unshielded cable, so you'd probably run into noise issues. Think of it in the same way you'd send a microphone signal (since it's basically the same after the stepdown of the first transformer). You wouldn't want to use CAT5 cable for a mic snake.
The two passive DIs used as an instrument extension tool through mic lines is done pretty regularly. Not the most perfectly transparent process, but it works.
Radial makes a good two box tool for that purpose too. It's powered, and pretty much dedicated (at least 1/2) to just one use.

Not that I have any footing to argue with Greg, but using shielded Cat5 for mic and line signals is a pretty standard and often seen thing these days. We do it all over the place out here at ShoeTown USA, Does infact need to be shielded Cat5 and Ethercon is preferred, but not a necessity, it just gives it a better locking connection. MUST use shielded Cat connectors AND Shielded CAT cable. 5 and 6 are within spec. Being that all 4 pairs will share shield you could get noise across the pairs, but that is no different in an xlr box where the connectors are connected to the chassis. I've run line, and mic with phantom power down Grounded Cat5e with zero issues at all. Well over 100'.

Dave Rat, of RHCP fame ( so you know he is fucking serious) makes snakes and boxes for it and you can buy cheap ones on Amazon and shit.

https://soundtools.com/products

Crazy. Well, it works for telephone snakes.
It's not great for different signals to share a shield, especially if any of them are unbalanced. Snake boxes or any other chassis shouldn't really be tied to the pin 1s of the XLRs, just the shell of the connector (which is isolated from the 3 conductor pins). A good way to think of ideal connectors is as an invisible part of the circuit, not tying to anything else, purely continuing a cable from one piece of gear to the next. There's a bunch of non-snake oil articles and books talking about proper mic cable properties. It's been a while since I've read anything about it. Being a cheapskate, I've seen/heard the difference between super cheap cables, and, say, Canare Star-quad cables (and their equivalents) for mic level stuff. I'm a convert, grudgingly. Same goes with mulit-pair snakes.
Also, 95% of all the problems in a studio have to do with bad or failing contacts. I can't see those tiny RJ45 connector contacts holding up over many years. It'd definitely be the weakest link. XLR connectors are great because of the larger surface contact (on good ones). We and most studios who adopted the Furman headphone mixer system were cursed with the failings of RJ45 connectors in even a semi-controlled studio environment. When people would modify them with the XLR shell version, it only alleviated some of the problems.
I'm totally on board with whatever works. There are plenty of scenarios where this should do just fine. I'd just get the willies if I had to trouble-shoot a system relying on that.