Can someone give me some insight.


This is sort of annoying and I need some help here.I have been auditioning different interconnects.MIT,Nordost,Synergistic Research to name a few.I thought I had a winner with Synergistic but what I am finding is when listening I am loosing volume in lead guitars and lead vocals.I have some Monster interconnects that I am trying to replace.If I just use the Monster IC's the voices and lead guitar is strong and open but there is lack of clarity..When I use any of the above mentioned IC's the lead voice and guitar are toned down a few db's and now seem more in the background.
I will admit that with the above mentioned higher end IC's everything is so much nicer.Are the Monster IC's over blowing the top end.I do not understand why this happens.
Last night I had the Nordost Red Dawns from pre to amp and was listing to and watching Roger Waters in the flesh-live.All sounded really good except Roger Waters voice was subdued and when it came time for some lead guitar it was also subdued and more in the background.This was being feed to my pre by hdmi and bitstream.I then changed to Synergistic IC and it was the same.Then the MIT and still the same.Then the Monster and the lead guitar and vocals returned to being upfront and in your face.
Since all the above higher end IC's exhibit this toning down the vocals and lead guitar I am starting to wonder if that is the way it is supposed to be.This also occurs when listening to cd's via analog direct or digital.
My system is Rotel 1069 pre.Rotel 1075 amp,Rotel 1072 cdp and B&W 683 speakers and bluray ps3.
Any thoughts on this would really help me out as I do like a lot of the IC's I have auditioned.Thanks.
shaunp

Showing 4 responses by blindjim


All wires are not created equal.

Their price tags confirm that.

The audio properties they possess also cnfirm that.

Are the SR cables active, do you plug them into the wal as well? Are they connected properly, with the active ends at the upstream end of the signal path?

Were the MIT, Nordost, & SR hot (previously been playing/passing a signal all along) when the switch was made from the Monster to either of them?

Were the MIT boxes set accordingly to the imp of the downstream device they got hooked to?

if not an unfair comparison is being made... interjecting cold cables or misconnected cables in place of hot ones isn't the best way to evaluate them.

SR active cables take a good while to do well, MIT do too, though for other reasons. Nordost has fewer constraints in reaction time, yet they too do better after playing for a time.

Everything does for that matter... play better, or sound better after some warming up has been going on. Everything. 'Cept maybe light bulbs.

I've had monster wires before... several types too. i did find them fuzzy, and attenuating certain portions of the bandwidth as was said already.

true too when you switch from one perspective to another it may be best to evaluate each perspective on it's own merits or demerits, than to compare to some other thing. Especially if the comparison is hampered via implementation timing or integration into a ssytem.

Especcially if the comparison is of varying components, ex. a $200 item to a $400 one, cabling which has no active shielding to that which does, imp matching attributes to non matching, etc...

properly AB'ing cables is tuff... and we all compare most everything to everything else, regardless costs.

sometimes it is as simple as allowing for more time for items to be fully seen, or just getting used to a different approach to recreating the sonic envelope.

some wires tend to drop the stage back, some bring it forward, other's seem to focus certain aspects of the bandwidth better by diminish another.

Even switching the imp box on the MIT cables, will take a little time for this newly energized section of the ckt to be run in fully.

I'd say to properly eval your covey of cables, each should be listened to exclusively for a week... and only critically after four or five days.

Take notes on each. How's the staging? Imaging? Bandwidth balance? Extension? how's the bass? Is it musical, dry, too refined, grainey, etched, bright, etc.

When critically listening, play the same familiar music.

Then, compare.

I'll assume here all are close to entry level cables as only the Red Dawns were named outright.

There will be differences i assure you, however they might be less drama between those diffs.

Either pick the ones that float your boat the best, or ones which add to the performance level of a balanced system. you pick. Always.
Getting Cables to audition from the cable co is a great way to get into seeing the diffs from brand to brand, and price to price... the thing is though, to only try out one or two pair at a time max.

AS was said, left alone cables can and do revert to being cold and need days of operation to come around... especially MIT. they should not have given you new cables. I[ve owned a few MIT cables and gotten them mainly from the Cable co... SR too.

it might also pay off for you to read the reviews posted here and by other users elsewhere online to see what interests you now... there are so many brands and levels of cabling, it could take a few lifetimes to check them all out.

Better wires let you hear better, your own gear. Wires do matter, don't think they don't.

good luck
The rest of that group likely need the same attendance or time at the helm as did the MIT’s, to really show what they are made of too.

It’s why I and other’s said try one or two pr at a time when renting/borrowing cables.

The MITs? BTW… they've not stopped changing in just two days.... their extension will increase some more.

Playing with the imp switch on those boxes, keeping both at the same position as you do, naturally, will either recess or encroach the midrange…. And why I mentioned it early on as selecting the proper notch for the downstream gear.

Move it about and see for yourself… it won’t hurt anything, and the selections are for approximate ranges and not cast into stone.

it tickles me to hear people say this instrument, or that one, was not in the right place (s).

Yeah? According to what? Oh, you mean where they were when you sat in on the original recording and maybe then too the mixsing? I think one would needs be in that venue or has heard the same recording on a vast amount of gear combinations that some better perspective might be attained as to orig placements of musicians… but it’s still a guess unless you were there, just more educated a one I suppose..

Wires can and do, change things more than just the harmonics. Another thing is those recordings aren’t always uniformly set about a stage. Sometimes it just be’s that way, especially with live recordings. Even then the mix may not completely follow the antics or movements of the players in fact. Like if there is no use of stationary or ambient mikes, and only those for the players who are restricted in their abilities to move about … singers, brass & reed sections, drummers, etc. Mixing recordings can place instruements just about where ever it is desired for them to be put.

I've yet to see a piano or vibraphone big enough to span the width of most stages, but I've sure heard them sound that large.

Think the ic world was nifty… now try some power cords.

Good luck

Shaunp

I think what I said was the mids could be recessed or made more prominate (marginally so, yet noticeable) by playing with the imp sw. Not louder or softer, although it might appear that way to some.

... and yes, other aspects of the sound do change too by moving that sw about. it was an eye opener playing with that sw. Teaching me the importance of properly matched and improprerly matched cabling, and what it can do to the sound, if the imp is not right or even close.

AS the Tech alluded too, those numbers aren't 'live or die' figures... given he pointed you to another settings. Their Spectral gear likley does very well on the lower pos.

I did post a review of some ICs, look there for more info as I simply can't recall exactly.

I've had mine set to where I like it so long now I don't recall exactly what all is affected and how, but those results are at your fingertips now, so do investigate.

it'll get more complicated when or if you go to XLR. They have two switches.

I sold my Magnums and now have Shotgun S2s. I use them off my rec into my tube pre for the rec's tuner and cable box radio stations, till I can find another pr. that suits me better. I would like to have again a magnum 1 or maybe a 2, albeit, not to supplant the S2, but to use elsewhere.

More playing time will show you still more resolution, and that buttery smoothness might fade some and morph into a bit more dazzle. it's probably due to the connections within the MIT cabling, as there are more in them than in most other cables.... and there's those components too. that all adds up to lengthier run in or re-run in times. or such is my exp.

Some say around here, simply leaving the upstream item on and the downstream item off, can aid the run in some. Not sure if that is applicable to MIT though... and my exp doing just that shows the effect as quite marginal at best There's no replacement for conducting a signal. IMO

In the end, that switch needs be where YOU need it to be in your system for your preffs. it's your dime, so you make that call. period.

Lastly, as imp varies, maybe this will show you more on that mechanism's worth. Say you add or mix a SE preamp, with a Balanced amp. Now what? The amps input imp is shown to be 50K. usually that means 50K total using XLR cables or both legs of the XLR interface. Or 25K per leg as RCA.

My exp says, it's either one of the two closest to the rated downstream input imp. the mid point usually is the one size fits all, selection... with some exceptions, and why the tech said use it.