Dan: I have auditioned the Venustas XLR balanced and AES/EBU digital interconnects. Both were sounding good. The only thing which bothered me a bit was the laid back and very polite sound of both the cables. I had less than 100 hours on them, so it is possible they haven't had enough break in time. I'm not familiar with the Aqueous, but I wonder how the speaker cable would sound.
Has anyone compared the Pure Note Paragon Enhanced and the PAD Aqueous/Venustas? I'm asking this because the Pure Note is among the best discoveries I had in the past two years. But if the PAD is really that better, I would like to home audition it too. Thank you very much.
Karmapolice, If you want to go the PAD route, you might try a set of PAD Venusta speaker cables. Two years ago, I tested them against the Au 24 and preferred them in my system: Granite 657 tube CDP, Supratek Syrah, Spectron Musician II (now III) and Van Schwiekert VR5-HSE. I still use and enjoy them. The difference wasn't huge (the AU24 is great cabling), but was noticable, and the Venustas are far cheaper than the Dominus. David
Well I borrowed from the cable company the purist dominus interconnect cable (xlr) and was immediately floored by how great they sound relative to my nordost valhalla interconnect. They sounded great instantly even though the cable company said I would have to burn it in for a while (even though they are a used latest version (not ferox)).
My current system is:
Wilson Watt Puppy 7 Lamm 2.2 hybrid amp Emmlabs dcc2 and cdsd digital emmlabs cable between dcc2 and cdsd audience au24 speaker cable
Because of the hefty price of the dominus, I also asked to demo the Purist Aqueous Anniversary interconnect (xlr) and speaker cable.
Even though these are no doubt newer, it was immediately clear that the Purist aqueous Anniversary interconnect could not compete with the dominus.
Sure you could listen for 500 or so hours and the sound would no doubt improved but the difference is night and day.
I am not surprised how much better the dominus interconnect is given the price difference.
I have also tried the Purist Aqueous Anniversary speaker cables against the audience au24 speaker cable which is a good neutral speaker cable.
Sadly, the purist acqueous again was easily bested by the audience au24 cable. Here I was surprised since the price is similar and the acqueous anniversary is a purist model so I would have thought it would be even more compatible with the dominus interconnect.
Bottom line, dominus is king.
Too bad, I can't also afford the dominus speaker cable.
I'm going on two weeks now on these Aqueous Anniversary interconnects and speaker cables. They keep getting better and more revealing all the time. The music is revealing details that I don't recall on previous listens. This is a terrific set of cables. Well worth the investment and a solid value as well.
I just bought the new Aqueous Anniverary IC cable. And it is by far the best IC on my Musical Fidelity Nu-vista Power amp. I had many on my Nu-vista; Valhalla, MIT AC-1 Oracle, FIM Gold, Cardas Golden Ref, Siltech's. But compared to the Purist we are talking about superiority. The low freq. are by far the best I've ever heard. It goed a lot deeper. The middle are more open than all the other cables I've ever heard. And the high's are open but sweet.
Albert,you have clearly indicated what a "Mensch" you are.Alluding to this last post,and the "Classy" way you handled my friend!! Now are you in a possition to "Loan out" any Mercury, White Label Promos?
I have raw component wire that I acquired from Purist Audio so I could wire the interior of my Sound-Lab speakers (when I owned them) and my Aesthetix Io and Callisto.
The conductor used for the various Purist cables is all similar but different design. All is OFC copper (like most high end cables) and some is constructed with silver wrap and with gold. I don't have tons of this to give away but would be willing to send samples to anyone who wants to be the tie breaker in this otherwise unsubstantiated discussion.
(Hint) It is miles from zip cord as you guys already know. Besides, even if another company did use equal quality wire (which I have no doubt some do) it's WHAT is done with the wire and (most forgotten!) the insulation that matters a great deal.
Kind of like giving the same ingredients to a fine chief and a guy at McDonalds. Same raw product going in, very different product coming out.
During my experimentation with various high end cables I got various contacts and much help from Albert (thank you) who I knew could point me in the right direction.
Being UK based I thought it could be tricky - the result was Purist's dealer - in Vienna I think - offered to *sell* me some cables and maybe buy them back if I didn't like them. Suffice to say I didn't take them up on their offer and never heard them.
Heh interesting, you weren't the only one to get the emails Tvad. I had an email or two as well.
I lowered myself and told him he couldn't appreciate anything he couldn't pony up for like the cables since he had to save the money in case he needed surgery in his county, as he was also berating the USA...
Really... the forums are for advice and help on how certain products integrate with others and to get better perspective and such... and you have children spamming your email.
Purist uses silver for most of their better cables, and some are a silver gold alagam. Purist are one of the best made cables I have ever seen. I have tried DIY cables and have been unimpressed. Mapleleafs3 is well aware of this information, yet he insists his 'european cat 5 is the best cable in the world. He has sent me about ten or fifteen of the most obscene e-mails arguing this point for the last few weeks, but ultimately admitted cat 5 sounds like crap. I have the brocure from purist. It takes about 180 hours to make a pair of their cables according to the manufacturer. The terminations and shielding materials are the best I've ever seen. I haven't seen every cable made, but I have done shoot-outs with friends which have used Cat, Kimber, Cardas, Monster, and Purist. The Purist simply sounded the best.
Realistically Rcprince , until there is a reasonably substantial body of reports on Aqueous Anniversary cables that are completely broken in, it will be difficult to define exactly the sound of these new wires.
I haven't read this entire thread for a while, but the one thing that surprises me is that Purist, a company I've long respected as making excellent, neutral products, is selling a special edition version of its cables that appears to be anything but neutral. I know that cable manufacturers have "house sounds" we can expect from them by virtue of their construction methods, the dielectric used, etc. (in the case of Cardas, there are different flavors), and that a truly neutral cable in all applications is never going to completely exist, but my past experience with Purist products led me to believe that their goal, by virtue of their proprietary jackets on the cable to eliminate outside interference and the use of special alloy wire, was to provide as neutral a connection between components as they could. Is this "colored" cable an abberation or an intentional design choice?
Thank you Grant, I rest my case. yet mapleLeafs3 was a 'good' theory, in that it lended itself to being proved true or false. As such, even if one doubted the veracity of the PF specs, one could presumably waste some perfectly good money and take a Purist wire apart to verify that the wires are made from utility grade lamp chord. Mapleleaf3, want to give it a try?
Dear troubled EBM---To me,even a new product, not broken in, should show promise right out of the box.I have always been suspicious of the "Wait forever" for it to break in,syndrome.Break in?Or get used to the sound?Which one do you think,EBM!!
Let's face it,the Venustas sounded GREAT,out of the box.I WAS there,when we installed it.You claimed it had very little break in,and I loved it,as did the others present.Now I know you have at least 150 hrs on the new cables(probably alot more).Are you running your stuff night and day,hoping for what at this point probably won't happen.All this risks the other equipment that has to run,for this amount of time.What about those pricey Siemens CCa's,that are running(and aging,btw)in the hope you "learn to live with" these new cables.What gives?It doesn't mean these cables aren't good.It seems they are not a great match for you.That's all.Common sense should prevail,at this moment!Playing a system for enjoyment trumps playing it to overcome a lengthly break in period.At least there should be something positive sounding,by now!!
I hope you get some degree of satisfaction,though.Time's running out.Unless you can really believe you need 500 hours more.Why not go for an even thousand?You DO deserve better!!Make a choice!Keep breaking in these cables,beyond the current 150 plus hours,in a sound you don't care for.Or go back to what you had previously,and shorten them 5 feet more,as you originally wanted to do.You know you were happy with the older stuff,and you can save your money for more important things,like a nice vacation,or something else.
500 hours to achieve the point of usability? I have to listen to a forward and fatiguing musical presentation for 6 months (20 hours a week) before I can enjoy my music again? I don't think so! Who is going to put up with this?
And then how do we really know the product "changed" after all this time? Or, did we simply adapt to its sonic signature and accept this over time? The only way to know for sure is to then drop in a new pair and do a comparison? And, does the removal of the older pair disturb the gremlins such that we need to go through another burn-in period?
It is one thing to get some refinements in the sound as a product settles down, but I expect something half-way decent from the start. Why should audio gear be any different than any other product in this regard?
On the issue of speaker efficiency, I run an older pair of SoundLab A1s. They do not have the latest cores but they do have the latest electronics. I suspect they are in the mid 80s of efficiency. Even if the AA speaker cables were not optimal with these speakers, it does not explain why there was such a prominent midrange hump whether driven by CAT JL-3 or Wolcott amps at low and high volume levels. Only the Coincident TRS speaker cables exhibited anything like this in past but not at all to the level of the AA speaker cables. No other speaker cables, Kubala-Sosna Emotion, Purist Opis, Coincident Xtreme, NBS Statement, Silver Audio Symphony48, PS Audio Statement, etc., exhibited such a forwardness and fatigue.
Hi i was told the AQUEOUS ANV cable takes more like 300 to 500 hrs to break in because of the CONTEGO Shielding i am using 21ft balanced. Has anybody else found this to be the case. Thanks EBM!!!
I found with the Purist Aqueous Anniversary speaker cables the more efficient the speakers the better they work; with lower efficient speakers or systems using high current amps the Venustas seems to work better (the Aqueous Anniversary speaker cable is only 12 ga. while the Venustas is 6 ga.) It would be interesting to try the new contego outer jacket used on the Aqueous Anniversary with the Venustas 6 ga. wires.
I have the Aqueous interconnect and liked it from the very beginning. So I figured I would like the speaker cable, so I sold my Purist Audio Venustas here at Audiogon, and had a pair of the Aqueous ordered and even had Purist Audio burn them in for the required time, which took an extra week for delivery. I was all excited when I got them, warmed the system up for several hours, sat down in my chair, and my first impression was, "I don't like these cables". I figured even though they were burned in by Purist, they just needed a few more days. After about four days, I didn't like the sound at all, the sound stage was shrunken, the bass was diminished, just overall not a good presentation compared to my Venustas. After about the fourth day, I contacted the person I ordered the cables from and asked if I could get a refund. Although this went back and forth for several days, I agreed to listen to them for a few more days. I did, and I still didn't like the system at all. I sent my cables back and ended up having to buy a brand new pair of the Venustas, which cost me a lot more than what I sold my cables for. I know better - I need to audition cables before I buy them. But the interconnect fooled me - it sounded so good. I'm not sure why these speaker cables in my system didn't sound good. I really did like the mid-range, but after that, I didn't like anything about the sound of the speaker cables. I definitely give a thumbs up for the interconnect, but a thumbs down for the speaker cables. Just my opinion from my experience.
Well, I called Purist Audio today and spoke with Jim Aud (when the receptionist transferred the call he picked up!). Interestingly, he is aware of a long running discussion about the Aqueous going on somewhere on the web; I'm assuming this is the one he heard about.
He did indicate that the AA sounds not too good straight out of the bag, and takes more than about 250 hours or so to begin sounding really good. He admitted he's not sure why this is. His description of the initial sound of the cables was very much like what Cmo indicated in this thread. I asked him if it was okay for me to pass this info along and he said yes. He seems like a pretty nice guy.
BTW, I called Purist about some other stuff, and figured if I had Jim on the phone I may as well ask about this. I made sure I wasn't taking up too much of this time. He was very nice about it.
I certainly agree with you about the CAT amps and resolution - they are among the finest resolvers of low level detail I have experienced in my system.
However, it looks like we are talking past each other here. Yin and yang in my understanding always have been accepted terms for describing frequency response characteristics (i.e. there is no amibiguity in their meaning, such as with prat - which really is related to transient performance - or with continuousness, which I think relates to dynamic performace across the frequency spectrum). Typically, yang refers to a frequency response that is tilted toward the whiter side of the spectrum. The extreme of yang is clinical (or as you put it, analytical), cold, sterile (in fact, your identification of the CAT Amp and preamp combination is a perfect of example of the yang side). Yin refers to frequncy response that is tilted toward the warmer side of the spectrum - the extreme of yang is referred to as dark, fat, tubey, etc.
Thus, to rephrase my previous comments in more acceptable terms, my system tends to lean more towards the analytical side of the frequency spectrum than yours, which is why I think the Aqueous would work better in my system than yours. Further, your identification of the Aesthetix premps also matches my initial perception - I think anyone would say the Callisto is certainly more towards the yin side of the spectrum than, for example, the preamp in the DCC2.
I also agree that "decay" is important - although decay is also a result of transient performance, low level resolution, and, depending on exactly what one means by decay, microdynamic performance. It is these latter two qualities that are most important for me. If a system cannot provide resolution of low level detail, and does not excel at microdynamics, I become bored with it rather quickly. I thought the Aqueous did an exceptional job with these characteristics without leaning two far to the analytical side of the frequncy spectrum (and hence found it have the best balance of characteristics that are important to me).
As to the Opis, as I think about it, I probably committed the same error I cautioned against - I only gave them about 50-75 hours or so before I gave up on them. Did they change singificantly during break-in as well?
I had the cables in my system for about a week (30-40 hrs??). I heard no change during my time with them......... If it's like Albert says, we may have been WAY off the mark.
BTW, my system is both yin and yang...... that's why I like it so much.
Once again, what is "hooded"? Does this imply constrained dynamics or maybe a clipped-off top end or ....? Neither of these were my observations with the AA. Again, my experiences were the opposite; the presentation was simply too forward and fatiguing rather than a coherency across the band.
The Opis speaker cables I have were played on my system for nearly 2 months before I did the shootout to the AA speaker cables. I would put a fair estimate of hours on the Opis at 150 hours. I have no idea how many hours the AA had before I auditioned them. If they had minimal usuage, I could have indeed judged them before their break-in time.
Unfortunately, breaking in speaker cables requires listening to music. And if the sound is terrible, you have to put up with it. I would have a most difficult time breaking in the AA speaker cables. Other cables like ICs and PCs I can do 24/7 with no sound coming from the speaker. So it would be nice if Purist could pre-burn-in these cables and thus give us a good first impression of these. One of these days perhaps I will get an opportunity to hear the broken-in AA's but for now, the Opis works incredibly well and I have no interest to change them out. There was absolutely no dynamic compression with the Opis. As for midrange subtraction, I did not experience this either.
Rzado: I do not pay too much attention to terms like yin(g) and yan(g), the totally worthless "PRAT" or the trendy here-today-gone-tomorrow, "continuousness", etc. I simply seek a balance, or better term, best-compromise, of dynamic contrasts, frequency-extreme coverage and the issues of dimensionality such as decays, portrayal of space, harmonic textures, etc. Since the time I first heard the ARC SP-8 and then later bought the SP-10, I have been a decays and bloom fanatic; the dimensionality issue has been #1 for me ever since. And from all the systems I have heard out there, only a small handful of them do it for me in this area. But two local audio gurus and a few others out-of-state who have much knowledge on the CAT, Aesthetix and SoundLab products have given me a lot of advice to pay more attention to the other sonic attributes. My system now has resolution like I never could have imagined because of the help from these people.
The CAT JL-3 Signature amps do dynamic contrasts and resolution like no other amps I have heard. But combined with the CAT preamps, this is simply too much of the same direction (analytical) for me. I find that the Aesthetix Io and Callisto preamp models do the dimensionality like no others I have heard. It is no surprise that the Aesthetix/CAT pairing results in an awesome integration. These driving the SoundLab A1 speakers make for an explosive, tonally coherent and 3-dimensional presentation. The primary source is Clearaudio Ref TT with either the Clearaudio Accurate or Koetsu RWS cartridges.
I ran the above system for much of last year with a mixture of NBS & MIT PCs and ICs and tried and tried to find a speaker cable to mate well. The emphasis was midrange warmth with only mediocre resolution and dynamics. With the system fully loaded with Kubala-Sosna Emotion cables, the performance took a major leap forward in coherency, frequency extremes and dynamics. There was for me however, a slight loss in the involvement of the music as the NBS had some characterizations I very much liked.....the decays and ambience. And this was why I investigated the Purist (mainly the Dominus) to bring back some of the involvement I had before but not to give up the newly discovered capabilities. You can read my detailed post on this topic in the Kubala vs. Purist thread that was started a couple days before.
One trap I want to avoid is to choose cables for the purpose of "synergizing" the tonality of my system. If I have to do this, I have issues elsewhere that need to be resolved. This was a lesson learned during the Kubala-Sosna cable audition. Changing cables for me should be to find the "best compromise" of the sonic attributes I mentioned above.
There really do appear to be some divergent opinions on the Aqueous Anniversary cable. I demo'ed the Aqueous Anniversary speaker cable, and in my current system it easily outperformed cables such as Cardas Golden Reference, Wireworld Gold Eclipse III, Nordost SPM, Kimber 3033, Purist Opis, Audioquest Mont Blanc, and others. The magic in this cable is in the midrange - tonality is accurate, (string tone is exceptional), images take on the appropriate body and presence, soundstage width and depth were very good (although not the best I have heard), transient performance was outstanding - both attack and decay, reproduction of low level detail was excellent, bass was solid, extended, with wonderful authority in the midbass. In particular, the reason I was/am so fond of the Aqueous is that it's hard to find a cable that is as revealing in the midrange that is not edgy or clinical.
As a caveat, however, if your system is on the "warm" side of things in the midrange, I think the Aqueous Anniversary might be too much of a good thing. In the system I have now (admittedly not my ideal setup - Verdier Platine, EMM Labs CDSD/DCC2, Cat JL-1s, Merlin VSM-Ms, Silversmith ICs), its just about perfect.
I have to admit I am surprised to read others commenting that this cable was "closed in." Does it have the most extended top end I have ever heard? No - that distinction belongs to the Silvermiths. But closed in? I can't picture it, based on what I hear in my system. I suppose there must be some system matching issues with this cable, and I have to admit to being curious to see with which components others are using it.
In particular, Jafox, what components did you have in your system when you did your demos? Your characterizations sound pretty accurate to me, except I had the opposite preference with respect to Aqueous v. Opis - I found the Opis, while a touch more extended at the frequency extremes, to be muted in dynamics and subtractive of low level information in the midrange - as a result, while it is a good cable, I never found it very involving. Thus, I am betting you probably have components that tend to sound more on the yin side, whereas mine are more on the yang side.
Also, I have to echo the above comments re: break-in - these cables certainly need at least 150 hours of break in, and probably closer to 250. Fresh out of the box, it lacks a bit of coherency, images sound overblown, and the bass doesn't have that full measure of extension.
While speaking with Purist last week, Jim told me the break in process for Aqueous Anniversary was a lengthy ordeal and the Purist break in disc (CD) has almost no effect on accelerating the process.
I don't know if this is a recent turn of events or something that he has been aware of all along. If the Purist disc was used to "burn in" at Cable Company, then shipping could have almost offset the gains.
The good news? Any type of music (including the break in disc) is fine, there just seems to be no way to shorten the "waiting period."
The Aqueous Anniversary I had on my CD player took several weeks before it stopped changing (running 24-7) and the Aqueous Anniversary power cords are still breaking in. Hate to say, but this might be a 175 to 250 hour break in cable.
J. Fox probably has more experience with the new Aqueous line than I do. I loaned him a lot of cables and we have been shipping back and forth. I recently switched to the Purist Anniversary (new top of the line), and preoccupied with getting it settled and discovering it's full capability.
I have had my limited supply of Aqueous loaned out nearly 100% of the time, so I've had little time to evaluate it for myself. There is a good deal of wiggle room between Venustas, Opis and Aqueous Anniversary. All are excellent and all different.
Which is most correct is in the ears of the beholder and perhaps none of these will be right for some members. There is a lot of differences between systems and what each of us prefer.
Jafox, the Aqueous is very powerful and is mysteriously related to the CLC, but in reverse, in that it acts on the listener rather than on the equipment. . . and turns our worst audio nightmares into psychosomatic reality. [chuckles!]
Seriously, with the several cuts I listened at CMO's with the Aqueous, the consensus at the ttime seemed to be that the effect was uninvolving, hooded -- as in not extended -- and sweet but slightly thin. I did not hear at the time an excess at the top, but we were concentrating mostly on some tracks from Edgar Meyer playing Bach on the double bass, which does not have exactly a piercing treble to start with. It is entirely possible that on other material I did not listen to, the treble overpressure may have showed up. I would welcome Albert Porter's comments on the subject of the Aqueous, as we all seem to have such a diverging experience with this wire. I am seriously wondering if some of the wires were shipped with some manufacturing defects.
Could it be the Cable Company's cables are not broken in as stated? That's where mine came from too.......... They are the ones Guido and I heard to be closed in on top........ I kinda thought someone had stuffed a giant sock down the throat of my speakers.
I have been trying the Aqueous Speaker cables from the cable comapny and I am not impressed. My old Ridgestreet Poimia !! cables sound better . Especially in the bass quality.
What does "hooded" mean? And closed in? Now we have the extremes ... "closed" and overly forward to the point of major fatigue. Don't think I ever read about cables that give everyone here such a different result.
As a good friend of EBM,I have to state that there seems to be a conundrum here,as the Venustas phono cable seemed to sound great,in his set-up.I hope everything works out!
EBM, that is exactly what I heard from the Aqueous as well. The sample I listen to was also a balanced set, though it was only 3 ft long. Could the positive reports mostly be for RCA versions? Or is it a mass case of H.C. Andersen's Chorea?
hi have Aqueous anv cable 21 ft balanced have 37 hrs with a pre burn in of 75 hrs at purist. Cables sounds hooded and closed dowm when will they open up right now my synergistic sounds better. Thanks!!
Tboooe, I plan on calling Purist next week. When I do, I'll keep you posted. From reading the posts above, it sounds like most find the Venustas to be the fuller sounding and the Aqueous perhaps a little more on the neutral side. My experiences with the Aqueous have been nothing but favorable in my system. The Aqueous have nice body, color and texture with good detail. I think I'm really limited in hearing all that the Aqueous can give me, due to the fact that I'm listening to my speakers (VSA VR4 Gen III SE's) with Purist's lower line 'Museaus' Speaker cables. But, the Museaus is absolutely the BEST BUY in audio speaker cables ever! So much performance for such a reasonable price - put simply, very musical. This is how I got started with Purist. Again, I'll keep you posted as to what Purist has to say.
louis1, I am thinking about the Aqueous or Venustas as well. If you dont mind I would be greatly interested to hear what Purist says about these two cables.
I purchased a set of the Aqueous 20th Anniv. Interconnects about a month ago. At first, I was concerned that I had made a mistake with this purchase. The interconnects (between my Audio Aero Capitole MkII CDP and my Audio Research VT100 MkII) at first sounded a bit strident. Not really harsh, just a bit tipped up for my taste. Being a HUGE believer in breakin, I reserved any final thoughts until I put the required 120 hours of breakin on the interconnects. My cables are 1.5mtr. so they probably needed a little more time, but, I can tell you, without any doubt, that after having them in my system for the required breakin, they are absolutely wonderful. I am, as they say, a happy camper, with no reservations about these interconnects (can you tell that I like them?).
What the Aqueous 20th Anniversary interconnects do for my system is all good. The tonality (to me, the most important aspect of a cables sound..or for that matter the most important aspect being able to enjoy an audio system) is neither bright, or dark, soft or edgy. The soundstage is as open as the recording allows it to be. They are extended on top without the edge (unless on the recording) and the bottom has nice weight (without being boomy) and definition. All of this, and they exhibit natural, rich sounding detail. They just sound, well, very, very good, and very, very right!
I now plan on upgrading my Musaeus speaker cables (talk about an over-achiever) to either the Aqueous or the Venustas. From what I read above, it'll probably be the Venustas. But, before I purchase anything, I plan on calling Purist to see what they recommend. Plus, I'll keep reading this thread for other peoples experiences with the new Aqueous.
Bottom line, for me, you can't go wrong with any of the Purist cables.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
