Thanks Doug.
Given you made one change in a power cord, and the result was significantly noticeable, I’d say the MIT speaker wires you have did their job. They allowed the impact of the change to become apparent. I’d say that’s a good thing. I’ve never heard of the tice cables you mentioned… but that don’t mean much. I’m somewhat myopic in regard to cables and gear, and to a good degree pretty conservative. Although I do try to steer clear of those with too much ‘unobtainium’ in their construct. MIT is not alone in the amounts of unobtainium they employ in the construct of their interfaces. So far as I’m concerned the end result is the ticket.
As my system is an excellent sounding one, and given personal prefs, I seek only to tweak it to my liking. My one great issue is the speakers. Although the JR’s do well, and extremely so for the price, they do not possess the traits in performance that I would most enjoy. Not knocking the JR’s per se, just pointing to the facts of preference. What I want in a speaker is going to become quite the issue as ones with high recommendations also come with high prices. Homage, Sophia, Utopia, Totem’s upper end, etc. A sweeter reproduction of the mids and highs using some wiring chages are the focus.
Regarding the thrust of the thread, and having decided as one poster mentioned, replacing a most integral part of the IC chain, there’s lots of ways to go. Another MIT and I’ve seen that synergy with two different MIT wires. Both added to the overall enhancement of system sound. Still another cable, whose power cords I use has made changes as well…. And I’ve found with those I’ve recently integrated that similar technologies, does add some extra quotient to the mix. With the MITs in the sys, there were two IC’s involved: Source to pre, and pre to amp. Two out of the three were the same brand. Good to great results were achieved... albeit with a slight reservation in regard to the degree of resolution. As smooth as my electronics are, exposing every last detail on a CD along with many times the fashion it was recorded & produced, just ain’t what I’m about.
Just now with the addition of a Synergistic Resolution Reference active xlr on the amp… which coincides with the Signature 10 speaker wires I have on the JR’s, there seems another bit of synergy going on. I’m not thrilled with having to plug in wires to the power outlet if they ain’t power cords though… but ever how SAR came up with this notion of active networks for their cables… it sure is surprising what the benefits are. Amazing actually. Turn off the power to the cables and they simply aren’t the same. Nowhere near it. Plugged in though, and they are fairly remarkable. The additional benefit of less worry about crossing over other wires is diminished to just an afterthought, but for me, a good afterthought given I’m a bit ‘hard of seeing’ these days. But this is about the sound. And thus far the sound is quite good. Smoother than the MIT with near the same presence in the mid. Tight bass but not as abundant as the MITs. A silkyness in the top ranges yet with great detail. Symbols are as natural as I’ve yet heard. . . and air. Heavy on the air. They aren’t quite run in thus far and I’m splitting duty in that respect with an Ultra linear from VooDoo which has as much resolution as did the MIT Mag3 I previously tried briefly. The Ultralinear seems a mix of the MIT MAG3 & the Synergistic Res Ref. Lots of air, plenty of resolution, great balance, and very musical. I suspect that without another Ultralinear or VooDoo offering upstream or down, the resultant integration of a ‘stand alone’ IC at least in this instance, bears out to some degree, cable synergy. As my findings are not based on tons of different combinations of similar or dissimilar cables I can only go on what I’ve seen first hand…. No pun intended.
I have indeed realized the marked improvements when the same brand of cable either follows or precedes itself in the signal path. Of that I have no doubt. IN so far as MIT & Synergistic Audio are concerned. This ‘likewise cabling’ affectation or support of the signal does make sense. It would seem what is perceived as hype from cable manufacturers is not hype at all. It appears as simple justification. The cable makers ain’t using other cables when they are testing and developing their own lines. I’m satisfied with that bit of first hand knowledge. I found it true with having the same brand preamp & amp. Same brand ICs. Same brand IC & spkr wires. Same brand power cords at amp & AC line cond. Though I’ll still not dispute another’s experience with using different cables on components, be they likewise or not. I’ve one pair more to prevue and at that point I should be settled enough to make an informed choice as to which cable for the preamp to amp connection.
For me, it’s about the reproduction of music in such a fashion that it is involving, musical, and satisfying. I find it satisfying when it draws me in. When I’m swaying in my seat, slapping the chair arms, or openly remarking that the musicians I’ve just heard might well make a good living doing this professionally. That’s musical enjoyment in my opinion. Regardless the name on the components’ outside…. It’s how I feel on the inside. Getting there for me ain’t fun. Being there is. And ya gotta get there…. You want to see Mickey Duck, you gotta go to Disney. How ya get there is a whole different ball game.
“Same – same” does have the upper hand presently. IMHO. stay tuned.
