bigddesign3,
Yes, I have found that thinner speaker cable yields a more treble oriented balance. It seems obvious that a thicker cable transfers more energy which is desirable. The thinner cable would transfer less energy at every freq, but perhaps the handicap to the bass is more than the handicap to the highs, so it appears that the tonal balance of the thinner wire is brighter and more detailed, because more of the higher harmonics are emphasized. Maybe almarg can help with some sensible science to back up our listening impressions, rather than the pseudoscience of many cable designers. Ultimately, each listener will decide what he wants based on his subjective ideals.
|
techno_dude,
Electrostatics are plugged into the wall to get the voltage that charges the stator panel sandwich. Think of it as a giant thin Oreo cookie. The black outer cookies are the stator charged panel, and the white filling is the electrostatic membrane that responds to the musical signal. Therefore, the transformer that plugs into the wall and is used to step up the low DC voltage doesn't carry the musical signal. All speakers use crossovers and electronics to some extent, but the accuracy of electrostatics is mainly due to the low mass driver which is tightly controlled between the stators. I have heard the GT Audioworks ribbon/planar magnetic speaker. It is excellent and exemplifies many of the desirable qualities of good electrostatics. An advantage is its high efficiency.
|
techno-dude,
Good point about Magnepans, also true of ribbons. A fabulous speaker is Eminent Technology, similar to planar magnetics, so reasonable at $2500 direct for their top model. When I heard it with modest electronics, the midrange was SOTA, and the medium size of the speaker gave a good image in the medium/small room. These speakers are not quite as accurate as electrostatics, because the electrostatic membrane is more tightly controlled than ribbons and planar magnetics. This factor of control of the membrane outweighs the downside of plugging in. |
WC,
Your description of the Odin speaker cable as having more articulation/separation and more decay than the plat 7 means that the Odin has more accuracy and resolution. But "huge sounding" with larger images is a characteristic of less accurate sound, as in the case of tube amps with bloated images, an exaggerated case. This has been my experience. We'll see as time goes by, but so far it seems like both Odins go for accuracy/resolution, which is desirable. I feel you made the right moves with the Odins.
|
minor,
Excellent balanced points you make. If we were all wealthy and retired with lots of time, it would be desirable to personally hear everything in own homes. Even then, it is not possible to hear everything, so choices have to be made. How do you make choices? A strong theoretical background helps. Knowledge of the house sound of pieces you have heard at home suggests in a general way what the sound of an unknown piece by that designer may sound like. Honest helpful contributions here would say whether you tried it at home, or whether you are doing intelligent speculation based on reviewers you have come to trust. To save space, we shouldn't have to create a lawyeresque description of these reasons every time we post. It should be assumed that everyone is sincere and not trying to mislead anyone.
|
WC,
I thought of a great analogy that further explains my statement that larger images are characteristic of inaccuracy. Imagine an attractive woman whose waist is 22. She looks great in a perfectly fitted outfit that shows off the details of her body. Then she puts on lots of sweaters and a large furry overcoat to go out in subzero weather. Now her waist is 40-50 and looking at her in the coat, you cannot see the details of her body and she is not as attractive. What the Odin and other accurate components give you is the leaner indoor look of her in the nice outfit. The less accurate components make her look larger, but certainly less detailed. These less accurate components create a fuzzy overcoat kind of halo around the core sound, enlarging the image but smearing it.
|
WC,
Glad you found my woman analogy useful. In my experience, no. 18 or 16 zip cord has focused the sound much better than any other cable, even the Nordost Frey 2 speaker cable. Many people say that zip cord has deficient QUANTITY of bass, which is true, and that zip brightens the sound, which is also true. But the overall clarity, snap and sparkle of zip is an overwhelming advantage for me. We had this discussion a few months ago, with someone recommending the Mapleshade cables. That designer feels that large cables fatten and smear the sound, consistent with my observations. Mapleshade is fairly cheap, and zip very cheap. Try the zip for speaker cables--you have nothing to lose, and you may be pleasantly surprised.
|
bigddesign3,
Agree on the merits of judging 1 thing at a time, patiently. What 8 gauge speaker cables are you using? Are they giant simple zip cord? What are their sonic characteristics, and how do they compare to other speaker cables you have used?
|
WC,
Please go back to my analogy of the woman in the big overcoat. From your description of the plat 7 speaker cable, it is like the woman in the overcoat--deeper and wider, but less accurate/detailed. But the Odin is like the lean woman the way she really is with an attractive thin layer of clothing. I believe you need to get accustomed to the Odin type of sound, both power cord and speaker cable. The Odin is less full, but more detailed and accurate. That said, the Odins may not be best value for the money. Try zip cord as I mentioned to see if you accept the zip type of sound--lean, clear, snappy, sparkly, tight but not full bass. To use a painting analogy, the Nordost Frey 2 speaker cable in my system was like a fuzzy impressionist painting, whereas zip is like a clear photograph. Impressionism is great visual art, but its philosophy is obviously different from accurate portrayal of the world. One day I will try the Mapleshade cables which may expand on the benefits of zip.
|
jetter,
I agree that the Sanders amps would be great to try, especially with Roger's 30 day free trial. I never heard them at home, but reviews are very favorable, with sound described as accurate and balanced. This description is similar to that from a nice man who spent a whole day driving me from NJ to Virginia to visit his client with one of the Sanders electrostatics. It was a complete Sanders ESL system with the ESL amps. It sounded great. From my reading of the Sanders site, the more powerful amps for dynamic speakers are also suitable for ESL's.
|
|
Grey9hound,
Thanks for the article. Makes sense. Still, I find relatively small subjective differences after break in, with components and cables. A big exception was the Nordost Frey 2 XLR interconnects, which were crystal clear at first and then became comparatively blurry. My Nordost Frey 2 RCA interconnects are still wonderfully clear and precise.
|
almarg,
Thanks. Yes, the "sound" of any cable ought to be able to be described in terms of objective characteristics like resistance, inductance, capacitance, length, characteristic impedance, insulation thickness/dielectric absorption, skin effect, as well as comparative amp/speaker parameters. Nordost gives most of these specs for each of their cable lines, so it should be possible to predict in a general way, the sound of each of their cables, subject to the unknown characteristics of the amp/speaker. I was just asking if you could take a simple cable like zip cord with known specs at different gauges, and approximately predict that bass frequencies are reduced more than high freq for thinner zip. You can make up some numbers for some amps or speakers you know, so you can estimate the effect, or just use a pure resistor as a model for a speaker (Maggies are said to be a pure resistive load). If this is still not possible for you to predict this, I thank you and respect your insight.
|
Dasign,
Yes, cable winding geometry and its consequent E/M field pattern is the big unknown factor. Perhaps this can be described in terms of familiar measurements of inductive and capacitive reactance, which vary with frequency. My knowledge of physics is rudimentary so maybe someone can help. Thanks to Al for his honest input. When Nordost and other companies publish their specs, they might be referenced to a particular freq, but what is missing is how these specs vary with freq. If we knew this, then maybe it would be much easier to predict the "sound" of a cable, instead of getting frustrated with system variabilities, asking the dealer to break cables in for 200 hours, etc. We are all in this random jungle of endless trials for cables, like prospecting for gold when the odds of a bonanza are slim.
|
dasign,
Right. What are the tonal characteristics that you hear with the Acoustic Zens? It seems that since we cannot correlate sound with known specs on any cable, auditioning is necessary. Variations in specs and distortions with frequency may be a major part of the explanation of sound differences. In effect, cables are like equalizers. At least with EQ, you can see what you are manipulating, but with cables you are blindly twiddling the dials albeit in a subtle manner.
|
grey9hound,
I think it is quiet here because WC is having the dealer break in one of his Odins. Maybe this is all good because he can just relax and enjoy what he has before making quick changes. Also a good time to consider cheaper but still excellent alternatives.
|
Sound quality is mostly related to creative thinking behind the design. Expensive things are related to parts quality and count, weight, which don't necessarily correlate with sound quality. WC has discovered this with a few pieces. On the 1st page of this thread, he said that the Emotiva 250 sounds as good as amps costing 10x as much.
|
lhasaguy,
Totally agree, especially how live music fundamentally differs from all hifi. Also, you can buy high value products like Mytek, Benchmark, Emotiva, Plinius, Oppo, etc., even at retail prices, as WC and others have found.
|
WC,
I urged techno_dude a while back to try the Shunyata Denali 6000. At home, my Denali is a big improvement, much more than any Shunyata power cord. The Denali creates better focus and detail across the freq spectrum. Images are thinner, which is characteristic of focused clarity, as I mentioned in my analogy of the pretty woman in a delicate dress. But there are no HF spikes or any suggestion of imbalances. Good move for you--you will be happy. |
I agree with jafox. DA converters have evolved to a common high quality, but the differences between DAC products have a lot to do with their analog output stage and power supplies. For those familiar with turntables, tonearms and cartridges, there are vast differences among all these analog transducers, almost as great as speaker differences. Analog circuitry shows somewhat less differences, but still greater than digital. It is truly great news that the inexpensive Oppo competes favorably with the Lampi. It is also great that WC has the honesty to reveal these truths, in contrast to the typical audio mag-rag that is biased toward expensive stuff because those companies bring in great revenue to the mag-rags.
|
WC,
One thing which is clear is the benefits of the Denali, which I have said yields bigger differences than many power chords. I just have the 6000 which I use for all components, and never had the need for the additional 2000 which is dedicated to the power amps. I am glad you have confirmed my findings in your system. Whether tubes or SS, today's best DAC's are converging to similar if not nearly identical sound characteristics. Even plain cheap CD players aren't a big comedown from SOTA digital systems, unlike the YUGE differences between cheap MM cartridges and the finest MC cartridges. Your confusion using different cables may reflect the truly small differences between the Oppo and Lampi, which will be true no matter what cables are in the system. Don't fret and feel you need to spend big bucks on cables.
|
|
I have not tried the Torus, but I tried another isolation transformer. It was heavy with 2 15A AC outputs. A minimal debatable improvement. But the Denali 6000 is a MAJOR improvement, as WC and others also noted. It is well worth the price. The technology is such that break in is done quickly at the factory. Prior to the Denali, I had an Isotek EVO sigmas conditioner, which was better than the isolation transformer, but not as good as the Denali. Go for the Denali. There are no reservations, like "this component is more detailed and accurate, but I don't get the seductive sound I like, etc." Enjoy it.
|
jafox,
Thanks for your detailed descriptions of your experiences. I now better know your tastes. My first good speaker was the Maggie Tympani 1D which I loved for its spaciousness and good accuracy. Then I realized that electrostatic transducers are more accurate than planar magnetics. I understand and agree with your assessment of ML stats as being "sterile" compared to Maggies, but what many people call "sterile" I regard as accurate. We hear the same things but have different tastes and preferences. I belong to a NY musical club named "The Bohemians" whose performances are held in a small 100 seat hall with a high ceiling and no carpeting. I sit in the front row in the middle, within a few feet from singers, 6 foot Steinway grand piano and other players. From this seat, I am shocked at how powerful and RAW the singers sound, of course unamplified. The sound is dynamic to the max, full, but definitely not sweet and seductive. There is smoothness but definitely not the kind of lush quality that may be heard in a typical midhall seat about 75-100 feet away. The sound at my close seat is more like "sterile"--so I realized that like it or not, "sterile" is accurate. The piano has a kind of iron-fisted impact, leaning in the direction of an anvil struck by a heavy metal hammer. The piano sound is full, dynamic, but also sterile. Most recordings are made with relatively close mikes with occasional mixing of distant mikes to get more hall ambience. The recording perspective is more like my front seat than the midhall typical listener seat. Therefore, for audio accuracy, "sterile" is the truth, although any listener is entitled to prefer a more lush midhall type of sound. As for you and me, I will better understand whether I might be interested in any component you evaluate based on your honest descriptions. Thanks for that.
|
dguitarnut, +10.
psnyder149, +10.
|
eziggy,
Right. You could say that ML stats are accurate, which is the same as unforgiving. I just wouldn't go so far to say that bad source = bad experience. On my Audiostatic 240 stats, I can certainly hear the flaws of a particular recording, such as 1980's digital. But I love the overall clarity and just ignore the few moments of digititis, so it is still mostly a good experience. I prefer this situation to one in which I am listening to a forgiving system where even though there are no nasty moments, everything is mediocre and boring. I want audio to be exciting.
WC, another woman analogy for you. A famous model of 20-30 years ago (Cindy Crawford?) had a mole near her left lip. This became her unique trademark. You would certainly enjoy being with her and forget about her mole. |
