Liquid Ceramics cables Has anyone heard these?


I read a article on 6 Moons about a new Liquid Ceramaics cable.
I searched this Forum for some info and there is only was one or 2 people that had an opinion. However there opinion did not include the cables sonic qualities.

They are supposed to excell in sounstaging but what about the bass or the Treble ?

Is there any one who has heard these that could give the sonic merits of these cables?
ozzy

Showing 8 responses by jfz

Ozzy - I responded to your e-mail and you can do a search for my previous comments, what other cables I've heard, etc. I genuinely think people are hearing what the REST of their system sounds like when they use these cables (at least the interconnects - I've not heard the speaker cable). In my system they are clearly not spongy on the bottom or rolled off in the highs. As with anything else, however, the system may require some tweaking afterward. Over and over, I find the best components reveal problems elsewhere(one of the great by-products of them!), enabling me to make some changes and get far better sound than before. I have no doubt at all that some who insert these cables and expect nirvana may be disappointed otherwise.
Ozzy - I wouldn't put them on your Audiodharma. I asked Bob Grost about this specifically, and he said "no". They need a few days to "settle in" (has to do with the liquid ceramic), but do not need the usual break-in per se.

Fiddler - Your results fascinate me, as I've been using the HMS Grand Finales for a long time as well! Just to clarify: my comments were not a theory, just my belief from experience. What is fascinating to me is that I had opposite results, although I posted sometime ago on another thread that initially I thought the CTs were rolled off in the highs as well. In the end (after tweaking!), I find the CTs have all the information of the HMS, but the fact that the CTs are much cleaner/quieter made me think at first that there was missing musical information (especially in the highs). The piano sound REALLY puzzles me, since in my system the CT's piano tonality is MUCH better than it was with the HMS. The leading edge or attack part makes much more sense to me, but again, - after making some changes, such as removal of room treatment - I find the leading edge and attack are even better (and far more REALISTIC) than with the HMS. My conclusion was that the HMS exaggerates and bloats the bottom end (fooling me for a while that it goes deeper than the CT) and hypes the highs a bit, but who REALLY knows which is more neutral. Just two different experiences in two different systems, I guess. The great news is that synergy is always important, i.e. so we both can enjoy our systems. Thanks for you thoughts. Hopefully both of our experiences will benefit others.

To others who might try the CTs: my suggestion is to give them a lot of time, and play with making other changes in the system, room, power conditioning, power cords, etc.
Thanks Fiddler. I'm in complete agreement with you, and suggest that anyone take my comments with lots of salt as well.
Ozy - You are the 3rd person to say the CTs were rolled off in the highs, and I can certainly understand that perception. Please understand that I'm not saying - at all - that your perception is wrong. Everything is relative, however, and if a person had tweaked his system with the CTs he might think something else was hyped in the highs. I'm only posting this because you said you tried them for a week - so this makes me wonder if you tried anything like opening a curtain you had closed earlier when you listened - or things of that nature. After doing that sort of thing, I found these cables actually have the most natural highs I've ever heard. What fooled me at first was that they sounded rolled off too. When I made changes (also including toeing the speakers in a bit), it was a very different story. As far as the bass goes: I'm interested in naturalness, tonality, pitch definition, and texture, as this is what I hear when I attend jazz concerts, including those in the home of a friend of mine - with no electronic enhancement (i.e. I don't hear slam).

Just my experience and views. I'm feeling like I'm beating a dead horse because I've posted several times - so I'll stop after this. I just feel strongly about how natural and realistic these cables can make a system sound - and I'd hate to see people give up on them prematurely given the price. ONE MAJOR CAVEAT that I forgot about in previous posts: I have only tried the interconnects and the power cords. And I DID find the power cords to be almost all midrange (and a somewhat lean midrange at that).

In the end hopefully all our (differing) views are helpful to other people who might try these and other cables. And, as you say, others should do their own listening and decision making. Thanks for your humility and even-handed post.
Stanhifi's post of 9/28: "Perhaps our systems are more sophisticated and reveal the inherent weaknesses of the Cerious cables. Just a thought."

Stan, this has gotten silly. You've been asked repeatedly to post your system, but you don't even respond about why you won't. Oneprof, Tbg and I have "revealed" : ) our systems, as have many others.
Norm - I'm very curious about what the CT speaker cables added to the "equation", especially given my reservations about the CT power cords. I'm using David Elrod's new speaker cables, which are wonderful, in conjunction with my CT ICs.

John
I couldn't agree more with Pat about trying to A/B CT cables. I had the occasion to disconnect part of my system on Saturday, and just that process (which included moving the CTs)resulted in the interconnects needing settling time to sound good again. It was amazing to me how much of a difference there was...very similar to what I experienced when I first received them.
Greenman - You make great points and ask a great question. I've learned over the years that the best way for me to make determinations about different products is through EXTENSIVE listening, i.e. listening for a long time with component A in the system (meaning many hours over considerable time - not just a day) and doing the same with component B, then back to A... As far as "knowing what we know", all I can say is that I know after this type of auditioning that I prefer one in my system, the RELATIVE "colorations" of each one TO THE OTHER, etc. With the CTs one can easily do the same thing. By the way, I'd certainly agree with the capricious memory thing if I were doing shorter auditions.