opinions sought on speaker cables ... MIT Vs. Nordost

[bdiament]

In my experience, things are "system dependent" when there are issues within the system. As individual links in the chain improve, there is the danger of blaming them for revealing what other links are doing.

 

I find brightness to be rather common in much audio gear - as if it is, in some way, a current fashion. A lot of highly touted components tend to "zing" in any system into which they are inserted. A cable (or other component) that "softens" the top half of the spectrum can only do so much but some folks may like the results. A neutral cable (or other component) will pass on its input signal - in this case, the "zing".

 

I'd heard reports of "brightness" with regard to Nordost's cables before I ever tried them. In fact, it made me hesitate. But a friend, whose ears I trust, was emphatic in suggesting I give them a try. So I did. I let them play in the system with music going continuously for about 96 hours before I sat down for the first serious listen. And then I bought them - to replace cables that cost three times their price. This, for the system I use in my daily work, where I need to be confident I'm listening to the source material and not to the system.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[Priaptor]

As a person who had used MIT often, it is not a cable for every system and in fact, lacks synergy with many systems. With some systems, it is actually what may be considered an integral part of that system, particularly with Spectral gear.

 

I also agree that many people do like and/or confuse "brightness" with "detail" and some cables can give an unnatural "detail" when mated with a system.

 

I will not mention the manufacturers, but there are those who ignore these differences and just use Nordost because "they are the best". Unfortunately, too many manufacturers do not want to offend another manufacturer so they are remiss in recommended one cable over another or what they find as the most synergistic, one of the exceptions being Spectral

 

[barrows]

in total agreement with Barry. If Nordost cabling sounds bright in one's system, take a long hard look at your components and, especially, speakers.

Unfortunately. Many Hi Fi brands seem to build components which are little on the bright side, this can make for an impressive short term demo (like at a dealer) as the brightness is often mistaken for additional resolution (it can highlight details).

IMO, Nordost cables just let the actual tone of the system through.

I am a huge fan of my Nordost Frey cables, as I feel they really let me hear what is going on, without any of the sugar coating that so many other cables do.

MIT uses networks on their cables, these networks are essentially RC, and/or LCR filters, designed to filter out very high frequency noise, and damp the circuit (circuit=amp output stage and speaker cable in this case) from resonances. I have a bit if a problem with this approach, because networks like these really need to be specifically tuned in value to the parameters of the circuit they damp, that is, different amp/cable combinations will need different part values in the network for it to work properly. Now, on their higher end models, MIT does allow for some tuning of the network by switches-but really this tuning should be done with test tones and a 'scope on the circuit to get it right, otherwise the network itself could be adding resonances to the circuit rather than eliminating them. Just tuning by ear is problematic in itself.

 

Priaptor: You have Nolas and ARC, right? Have you ever attended shows where Carl is demoing? I have heard various versions of the Grand Series speakers at his show demos with ARC and Nordost cabling, and the sound is always at least very good. I think you are pretty safe combining Nordost, Nola, and ARC amplification, as that seems to be what Carl uses in development of his speakers.

 

[mwheelerk]

I would most certainly never consider ‘looking at components’ to accomodate a particular brand of speaker cable or interconnect. That seems ludicrous to me and I would always seek out a cable change rather than components in tweaking a system.

 

Bright does not necessarily mean bad or derogatory in describing the Nordost Blue Heaven which is what I have specific experience with. I tried the Blue Heaven in two different systems at two different times and in those configurations other cables worked better for me and did not excentuate the high end as I felt the Blue Heaven did. Having an opinion on a cable and a preference over one or the other does not necessarily refer to a criticism of that product.

 

Your ears will be the should be the judge. It is system dependent, et al givens for any evaluation.

 

[barrows]

This is a sad reality:

 

"I would most certainly never consider ‘looking at components’ to accomodate a particular brand of speaker cable or interconnect. That seems ludicrous to me and I would always seek out a cable change rather than components in tweaking a system."

 

If you have a bright component, especially (and this is common with many speakers) a loudspeaker, the only way to get a system to sound its best is going to be to replace the offending component. While this may seem a "ludicrous" approach to you, it is the truth. Compensating for a "bright" component by adding a "warm" cable just reduces the overall resolution of the system, and means one now has two components which are coloring the signal with their own signature, rather than hearing what is really in the recording, one is now listening to them sound of the system.

The only way to achieve a system which will be true to the recording, is to have all components be as close to neutral and transparent as possible, and compensating for one components weakness by adding another weak component is a flawed approach if one wants to hear the truth of the recording.

 

 

 

[bdiament]

I guess it just goes to show you. (What I'm not sure. ;-})

 

I've heard Blue Heavens on many a system (of all sorts) and "bright" is not a word I would ascribe to the cables. Neither did they, in any of the systems, accentuate any part of the spectrum, much less the highs.

 

There is in my view, the possibility that both of the two systems you've tried may have had within them, one or more components with a character you are (I believe) ascribing to the cables.

 

Still, if they don't work for you, they don't work for you.

I just don't think the cables are the source of what you describe.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[bdiament]

Hi barrows,

 

Agreed 100%.

I never subscribed to one idea of one component "compensating" for another, the assumption apparently being their colorations would sum algebraically.

 

In my experience, it doesn't happen. Instead the result is the system now has two colorations instead of one. I've heard too many systems that were "bright" and "dull" at the same time. (Easier to hear than to describe with those words but they are not at all inappropriate.)

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[Part-Time Audiophile]

I guess I consider every component to be a tone control, more or less. There is no such thing as "neutral", is there?

 

Don't answer that -- the answer is "no", at least not in an objective sense. True, there are components that everyone would consider to be colored, but of those that get described as "neutral", that declaration gets qualified all different manner of ways -- depending on what's hooked up to it. Does that mean that the component is not neutral? Or that the other device isn't neutral? Or that the combo is not neutral? At first blush, the answer isn't obvious, regardless of the declamations that are made either way.

 

I really don't like the term "neutral" as some kind of metaphysical statement. The meaning of the term varies by person and even for any given person, it means something different for each component it's applied to. It's all relative -- unless you have the measurements to prove otherwise, I think it's just safer to back away from the notion and move to something more unproblematic.

 

Like "awesome" or "ass".

 

In a slightly different venue, but to illustrate the point, I've never been particularly enamored of Bryston or B&W. Both did what they did, and whatever that was, I never found myself much of a fan. But at AXPONA, I got to hear them together for the first time. Somehow, the Bryston amp really opened up the B&W 802d speakers. The room sounded fantastic and was the best I've heard from a system that sported either bits of gear. Tone control? Who cares!

 

Just a cautionary note that we're wandering a bit into hair-splitting territory at this point as cables really don't and won't warp your system from any one extreme into any other. You can nudge. But a cable is never going to make a Maggie more dynamic or make a cone-speaker more coherent. You want different sound? Buy new speakers.

 

[bdiament]

Hi Scot,

 

Perfectly neutral is a tough one. (Though I've yet to identify the coloration of a ULN-8 operating at 24/192.)

 

That said, there are degrees of transparency and to my ears, some gear does a whole lot better at this than other gear.

 

Also in my own experience, the degree to which a cable will affect the total sound of a system will vary with the cable. As with anything else, the more transparent, the better "view" one has of the rest of the gear.

 

I would add that just where one gets the most "bang for the buck" in any given system depends on what its weak link is.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[Paul R]

we're wandering a bit into hair-splitting territory at this point as cables really don't and won't warp your system from any one extreme into any other

 

I would suggest it might depend upon the cables. I am on the very low end of Nordost cables - as in the cheapest Nordost speaker cable one can purchase.

 

Yet, when I put them in, they made an enormous difference in my system. Second in impact, only to putting in the Maggie 1.7s.

 

To put that in perspective, putting in a very much better amp made a large difference in the way my system sounds, but not as large as the speakers and cable did.

 

-Paul

 

 

[Priaptor]

That is indeed what he is using. He has "designed" his speakers using Nordost and ARC.

 

 

 

[barrows]

Somewhat agreed in theory, but I remember walking out of a certain room with you at RMAF this year, thinking it sounded very bright, and you quite readily stated so...

While in the nuanced way I agree with you, some components, and especially speakers, have a very obvious high frequency emphasis, which is not subtle at all.

While it is difficult, I still feel it very important to try and avoid the idea of tuning tonal balance by combining multiple, highly flawed, components. Few of us have the reference points to know what neutral is (Barry D. is one person who has better reference points than most), but it is still important to try and develop our listening skills and experiences with many different systems and components, and music sources (live music being one) to be able to start to approach the idea of neutrality.

If we, as audiophiles, do not try and develop a sense of neutrality, we will be forever lost in combining flawed components to try and come with a "balance" which we "like". If we add a new element to our system, and then find the resluting tone objectionable, it is important to honestly ask the question; is the new element to blame for the tone problem, or, is the new element now just revealing a problem which has been present all along. If we cannot answer such questions with reasonable accuracy, over time, we will forever be stuck in a circular state of "upgrades" constantly adding additional flawed elements to our systems, and not actually achieving improved fidelity.

 

[bdiament]

Hi Paul,

 

**"...putting in a very much better amp made a large difference in the way my system sounds, but not as large as the speakers and cable did..."**

 

This mirrors my own experience with the Nordosts. After hearing them, I no longer considered cables mere "accessories". They just seem really good at "getting out of the way".

 

When I first tried a pair of Valkyrja's to replace my Mogami Neglex (perhaps the best of the pro) mic cables, I was shocked at how much more transparent the results were, how much more faithful to what I hear from the position of the mic array at recording sessions. The Nordosts showed just how harmonically bleached, bright (and yes dull too) and thin my old cables were.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[bdiament]

Hi barrows,

 

While I am fortunate in getting to compare components with my mic feed and my mic feed with what I hear from the position of the mic array at recording sessions, there is something anyone can use to help determine how transparent a component (or their system) is:

 

Differences between different recordings.

 

In my experience, every recording, every master, sounds very different from every other master (due to countless factors). The larger the differences between recordings, the more transparent (or "neutral") the component (or system) is. Any coloration imparted by the gear gets applied to everything that passes through it, diminishing the inherent differences.

 

The worst gear (in my view - despite all too much of it receiving accolades in the audio press) will in some ways, make different recordings sound quite alike. (As an example, I'm thinking of a certain highly touted DAC - actually more than one - that applies a certain "zing" in the treble to every signal that passes through it.) Folks might like what it does - and I'd never argue with what brings anyone listening pleasure - but transparent or neutral have nothing to do with it.

 

The best gear seems to have the ability to "get out of the way" and allow what feels like direct access to the recording itself. This will reveal just how very, very different every recording is from every other recording.

 

Best regards,

Barry

www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

 

[Daphne]

Over the years I have had so many brands and models of cables, I cannot remember all of them. Over the past five years I have used Cardas and Nordost Frey interconnects and speaker cables. I came upon a great deal on a box filled with Audience cables. I started by replacing interconnects between source components and my Mark Levinson 326S Pre Amp. The balanced AES connection was an improvement over singled ended RCA connectors. The Audience AU 24e cables were an improvement over the Cardas cables, and if there was a difference between the Nordost cables and the Audience, I could not hear any. Anyway, I changed all interconnects to the Audience cables and for the following month I was not displeased with the sound quality.

 

At the time I was using MIT cables from the Pre Amp to Mark Levinson 436 mono amps. I was quite pleased with these cables, but with a box of cables sitting open on the floor I just had to try them. I did not expect to hear any improvement mainly because I am skeptical about all the pseudoscientific claims associated with cables. I was surprised to actually hear a difference when using the Audience AU 24e cables. The highs were more defined, no difference with the midrange, but the bass was a little more defined. I was using MBL 101 speakers at the time.

 

I cannot claim there is any advantage with Synergy of cables, and I am not sure anyone can. Nevertheless, The Audience cables produced a slight improvement in the sound quality.

 

After another month I changed the Nordost Frey speaker cables with the Audience AU 24e speaker cables. There was an ever so slight improvement in the mid bass, but not enough that I would tout any major improvement. If there is a weak point with the MBL speakers it is the crossover between the midrange and bass.

 

The two items that produced the most dramatic changes in my system was switching to dedicated AC power supply and adding a Torus isolation unit, then working with an acoustic engineer to improve my room acoustics. After the AC power improvement I had three dedicated 20 amp wall outlets, but the center outlet did not have the capacity for 6 components. I purchased a Shunyata Hydra V-Ray V2 which included a Python power cable which replaced a common power strip. I also converted all component power cables to the Audience AU 24e cables. I am not going into explicit details of the sound quality improvements, however I can say there was an improvement with the source components, but the V-Ray demonstrated absolutely no difference with the amps.

 

A year later I replaced the MBL speakers with Wilson Maxx 3 speakers which was a major change in overall sound quality. Then I improved my room acoustics which produced a dramatic change, more than I was told to expect. Except for upgrading my DAC to a Weiss 202, I did not make any changes to my system for about 2 years.

 

This past November I was given a pair of Shunyata Python Zi-Tron speaker cables to try out. I thought, Good God, here I go again. I have gone from cables that looked like ribbons to a thin cable to the Shunyata cables that are as thick as a garden hose. All three brands have their special philosophy on wire, each with enough hyper marketing spin on words to cause anyone to be skeptical. Well, I noticed a remarkable difference in sound quality, especially from mid bass up. Cleaner, more defined, a little more neutral. I did not hear any difference in soundstage, I have with different components, but not with a cable (that is just my experience). After a week, I decided to switch back to the old Nordost Fray cables. With new speakers and room treatments I thought any difference may be more revealing. I was right, and the Nordost Frey ribbons in some ways were superior to the Audience speaker cables. However, neither could match the sound quality of the Shunyata Python cables. I must admit to being impressed enough that in the future I may even be induced to try out a pair of Python interconnects. And when it comes to high end cables, Shunyata cables are very reasonably priced. In addition I have not read or heard any harsh criticism regarding any Shunyata products.

 

I am one who firmly believes there is not a big difference between cables (except for balanced AES over singled ended RCA). I recall the one company who started all this nonsense with cables was Monster, and the chief designer and engineer of their cables is the same person who founded MIT. Can anyone remember when high end speaker cables were nothing more than large gauge zip cord? So when a speaker cable comes along to prove my opinion wrong, well, I was somewhat dumfounded at first. That does not mean I will completely change my opinion, after all I was an insane snake-oil junkie for about a decade. Oh, I truly wanted every bizarre tweak to work, but in the end, very few actually did.

 

There is a lesson here. If one starts with a good pair of revealing speakers, supplies clean AC current, and refines the room acoustics, then maybe, just maybe, you will be able to hear the subtle differences with a variety of cables, but I cannot promise any guarantee you will.

 

I now have in my possession a new method of listening to the difference between DACs, digital cables and components from the pre amp back to the source. I recently purchased for an outrageously low price at an auction a set of Stax SR-009 headphones with a HeadAmp – Blue Hawaii SE Electrostatic headphone Amp. These cans are so revealing, the details are shocking, beyond any headphones I have ever listened to. Want to know the difference between USB or Fire Wire or S/PDIF cables, you will hear the difference. The problem is, deciding which one you like over the others.

 

In conclusion, if the fractional difference between cable brands is causing your eye to twitch, or leading your music listening experience to a migraine, then a cable seeking adventure may be a good cure. It may even produce a welcome feeling of self-satisfaction. Until the next time. That may sound a little cynical, but I have come to the point where I enjoy the music far more than tweaking with cables.

 

 

[Rob McCance]

I like sexy over priced high end cables like the next guy, plus they look cool.

 

But, as a Engineer, I can look at a conductivity / resistance chart for various metals and have decided to spend all my money elsewhere. In fact, you don't even need to be an Engineer, lol.

 

I use good ole oxygen-free 10 gauge copper cable, like the ole original Monster Cable. Roughly $1 a foot.

 

I soldered on some killer Banannas to keep 'em sexy.

 

 

 

 

[Jeff In San Diego]

+1 from me on making your own with 10 gauge copper and some nice banana plugs.

 

Both my ears and my system will have to get MUCH better before I'll be able to hear the difference between these cables and something "better".

 

[wdw]

..to the last two posters....you guys remind me of some of my dear friends who make their own homemade wine...they hoist a glass and proclaim "it's easily as good as any 15$ bottle you can buy in the store" but they've lost that ability to tell because they never buy that $15 bottle, likely never did, so have no meter to tell...

these things, cables, are components in themselves and should not be dismissed out of hand.

to the poster who said "I'm an engineer so....", we've been there before...I'm an engineer, in an office of engineer's. we're not the most free-thinking of souls...it's always disappointing when my compatriot's choose the safe road, the easy road, the timid road...

WDW

 

 

[Rob McCance]

You got something against oxygen free 10 gauge speaker cable?

 

 

 

[wdw]

...

 

[Brian A]

The question of hearing cables is a mulberry bush we have run laps around many times in this forum.

 

There are different levels of systems and different levels of aficionados. They are all called “audiophile.” Some people care about cables: others don’t. So it goes.

 

 

[Rob McCance]

Great analogy!

 

I care about cables. I just believe that my $40 worth of 10 gauge oxygen free copper is getting me 99.9% of the way there and I'm not interested in spending magnitudes more for micro fractional gains, if any.

 

If people really cared about cables, they would eliminate them by putting a monoblock amp directly behind each speaker and running super short copper, gold or silver straps between the amp and speaker, maybe 1/2" long, or shorter.

 

Now THAT'S an Audiophile.

 

[Brian A]

It is good to state it the way you have; as a belief system. We must all be careful not to assert personal observation as universal truth.

 

There seem to be some excellent systems that don’t benefit from cables and their owners have no need for anything more than 16 gauge lamp cord.

 

Other owners have systems that benefit from peripheral changes such as cables. No; from a resistance / impedance / inductance perspective, it doesn’t make sense.

 

 

 

[Rob McCance]

I have no doubt that different cables make different sounds in different systems.

 

I also have no doubt that this table is correct. Notice Copper is #2.

 

Silver 1.59Ã?10â?'8 6.30Ã?107 0.0038 [3][4]

Copper 1.68Ã?10â?'8 5.96Ã?107 0.0039 [4]

Annealed copper[note 2] 1.72Ã?10â?'8 5.80Ã?107 [citation needed]

Gold[note 3] 2.44Ã?10â?'8 4.10Ã?107 0.0034 [3]

Aluminium[note 4] 2.82Ã?10â?'8 3.5Ã?107 0.0039 [3]

Calcium 3.36Ã?10â?'8 2.98Ã?107 0.0041

Tungsten 5.60Ã?10â?'8 1.79Ã?107 0.0045 [3]

Zinc 5.90Ã?10â?'8 1.69Ã?107 0.0037 [5]

Nickel 6.99Ã?10â?'8 1.43Ã?107 0.006

Lithium 9.28Ã?10â?'8 1.08Ã?107 0.006

Iron 1.0Ã?10â?'7 1.00Ã?107 0.005 [3]

Platinum 1.06Ã?10â?'7 9.43Ã?106 0.00392 [3]

Tin 1.09Ã?10â?'7 9.17Ã?106 0.0045

Carbon steel (1010) 1.43Ã?10â?'7 6.99Ã?106 [6]

Lead 2.2Ã?10â?'7 4.55Ã?106 0.0039 [3]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I know it's been mentioned here before, but I can't help myself this time. I chuckle every time I think of a cable company (Shunyata) that names its products after snakes or snake references.