Anybody tried 20th Anniversary Purist cables?

Well.......... It's like I said earlier; I greatly preferred the Venustas to the AA. I don't know if it was some kind of system mis-match (which I doubt) or the cables were not broken in as advertised. I have not found a cable that I prefer to the Venustas in my system. Are they closed in?........ NOT. I find them to be as detailed as the AQ Sky, but to also have a more textured, three dimensional quality. Guido is right on the money with his assessment of the Sky; it's very revealing and extended from top to bottom. The point that I think the Venustas betters the AQ (and where I differ from Guido's take) is in Harmonic complexity........... and again, that happens (for me) in the midrange.

The one place that I think the AQ betters the Venustas is bottom end extension. The bass is a little tighter and deeper with the AQ.

As to the question of AA or venustas..... I would have to say borrow the cables from the Cable Co. and judge for yourself. I am not trying to be elusive, but it looks like people are having some very different results with the AA at this point.

I agree with Cmo about the textured, three dimensional quality of the Venustas. I don't find them closed in at all. IMO, the Aqueous Anniversary have better HF extension, but with less musicality than the Venustas (which I believe comes with some roll-off in the HF). I like the combination of the two.

I would not own two pairs of Aqueous Anniversary, while I would happily own two pairs of Venustas.

Thanks guys. You both have been a great help. Like all cable matching issues it sounds like there's no free lunch here. A careful selection of cables is needed even in the highest echelon of IC products.

You're welcome. Try 'em both.

You cannot get performance from anything even close to the price and Purist was a huge success years before AudiogoN came along, or Albert porter began to sell them.

The misinformation from Stanhifi continues to fly...