Unclegingivitis? Look - has anyone taught you how to read? I never made a comment about MIT's sound - only the "technology" for want of a better word. BobBundus has so many pro MIT posts you'd think he was the inside sales dude for the Brisson Boys or that he's getting a cut from Joe Abrams with how many posts he's had telling folks to contact Joe.
You need to read and retain, Maxxie bubba - and seek to understand what is being said. I don't have anything against anyone preferring these cables - I just have an opinion, my opinion, that truly good hi fi doesn't need second order low-pass filters doing any kind of "power factor correcting" nonsense to the hi fi.
Think about this, Maxxie - at first the argument presented was that the "networks" aren't there to correct the hifi but are there to correct the cables themselves. That leaves open the argument for not making cables at all but making boxes that attach to other people's cables (much more useful idea).
THEN, the cables aren't cable correctors after all, they are Power Factor Correctors (correcting the inductive load of the hifi by adding in some parallel capacitance) - so they aren't, in fact, correcting the cables they are generically correcting some imagined power factor efficiency problem between the amplifier and the speaker (which amp and which speaker? Who the hell knows ... it can't be all of them at once, can it?).
I'm always amazed when arguments like this one are raised and all the pro-macigbox people come out of the woodwork and shake their little magicboxes in anger at the challenger screaming, "I don't care what you say - they sound good in my system!" Yeah? So what? That means you blew a bunch of money on a system that sounded like crap until you were able to "fix" it with some second order low-pass filters on your wires.
Wow - I'm impressed to the Max, Maxxie. But that's not even the issue - the issue is that these hocus pocus magicboxes are filters. My position is that truly good hifi isn't in need of filters. I've presented a sound argument and have been challenged with nonsense and circular logic.
Hey - if you love your magicbox cable - then love it. Love it on your own terms, but don't pretend for a minute - for a second that they are doing something other than changing the signals that are passing through them. That's a filter. It don't get no easier than that, Goob.
And purposefully changing a signal is not, in my opinion, what High End Audio is about - not what a truly high resolution system requires. Spend tens of thousands of dollars on an amplifier and and tens of thousands of dollars more on speakers, and again on preamp and source ... and they won't work perfectly together with good precision cabling? They need some mystery-box-cable hooking them up and filtering their signals in order to sound right? Man - if that were actually the case - the manufacturers of amps, speakers, etc - whatever these things pretend to fix - would have dissected these boxes faster than fart leaves a dog and put the stuff in the components themselves. Hasn't happened, Maxxie - and that's a shame for the probox people because it's the amp makers that are in a better position to determine what values these filters should have for their particular products. The magicbox boys can't make a signle filter for all seasons and expect it to work perfectly in all cases - it's just not possible.
So enjoy your boxes, no one has told you not to. I've only presented an argument that correctly characterizes the boxes as filters and presents the opinion that real high-resolution audio doesn't need the help of generic filtration.
Complete nonsense. |
My cables:
Nirvana SL Speaker Cables
Nirvana SL Interconnects between DAC and Pre, and Pre and Amp
Kimber Orchid between Trans and DAC |
Maxiepooh - I read your system outline and I agree wholeheartedly that you need filtered wires. If I were you I would consider more MIT for loudspeaker cables ... -or- unload the ARC stuff and replace it with real hi fi.
Your first sacrifice - unload the SP9 and find something like a used CAT SL1 or Counterpoint SA-11. Get some fresh tubes and burn it in ... then take that magicbox out and realize that it was taking the snazzle out of the uppermid/lowertreb glare on the SP9 - and you'll also hear way deeper into the music.
Next - out with the VT 50. Wimpy. Try getting an old Jadis Defy 7 Mk.II or above. Pull the magicbox out and hear the real magic of real tubes done really well. The Mk. I - bad idea, might catch fire. The Jadis combined with the CAT or Counterpoint pushing the Vandies - you'll shit a new VPI Brick after you realize what you've been missing. Especially if you get yourself a nice pair of Kimber 4Ag to drive the 2ce's with.
The 2Ce's are great speakers - they need great electronics in front of them.
Aloha |
Maxgain - MIT and Transparent are the same. The Sumner's stole fire from the the MIT demigods.
As for litz wire - it's good stuff, inexpensive on the used market, and it doesn't pretend to fix imaginary gremlins with "power factor correction" and "transmission line compensation" or whatever gobbledegook you repeated on this thread. |
...even if we disagree about what "neutral" means.
I've got some pretty expensive and hi res products going in my rig, and I've tried some of the top macigbox reference cables for loudspeakers and interconnects - gave a long chance - but they just did something to the sound that I didn't like. It got all extra detailed on top and bottom but the midrange disappeared - like someone eq'd my system with a 'disco curve' bump the highs and lows and suck out the middle. It didn't sound like natural music to my ears (I listen to a lot of acoustic guitar/vocal stuff).
Regardless - it just doesn't make sense to this old hack that some "network" (fancy name for filter) on a cable can make a megabuck high resolution system perform better than its designers intended it to perform. Passive "networks" work by taking something out of the signal. "Power Factor Correction" is essentially parallel capacitance - fine for induction motor systems and power supplies - but mixed with the essential series L of the circuit that it is hooked into you get a second order low pass filter.
You say you like it. Great. I'll never argue with you about what you like. All I've been saying is call it for what it is and don't pretend its something magical and unknowable - I realize that many folks need to imagine that it's too complicated to grasp in order to justify spending big money on sexy boxes, and for them ... well, I never quarrel with religeous people because there's way too much 'faith' in the argument and I like proof.
And proof is really where alot of this bug me. You can buy a kazillion dollar amplifier, speaker, preamp, cd player, whatever ... whip out your screwdriver and have a look inside and see what they are doing and where your money has gone. With these magicbox cables, everything is a big secret and sealed up inside so you can't see what you spent your money on. You have to take it all on faith if you're going to opt in. |
As I replied to Abal, even parallel capacitance as a "power factor correction" will, together with the series inductance of the circuit (and perhaps even an inductor in the magic box) create a second order low pass filter - but maybe just maybe it works as you say it does, and maybe that is desireable.
IF that is the case ... why not just make add-on boxes with leads on them instead of making whole cables? Jack Bybee does this, Walker does this, there are a couple of aftermarket boxes that work in this gap - why not MIT and Transparent? They aren't selling cables, per se - they are selling cable-fixers. So why not fix a greater variety of cables with the magic boxes?
And if the magic box prevents reflected energy from returnining to the feedback loop of an amplifier, would it be safe to assume that they wouldn't have this effect with amplifiers such as zero-feedback SET types?
And cables that are THAT reactive are just poorly designed, IMHO. But as you say, "This explains why synergy is so critical when trying to optimize your setup, and why a particular cable set works differently when placed into different electrical environments. This is an unavoidable fact of life for any cable." - basically we understand each other in that these magicboxes cannot be optimized for all systems, but can fit only particular systems and this with only varying degrees of optimization depending upon how far from the original modeled system the system under test falls. |
I don't know much about what they are doing by direct experience - but I will tell you this much: back in the day a guy named Demian Martin came up with and patented something called a "cable charger" and it seemed pretty interesting - keeping a bias voltage charged on the shield. It seems to me that Synergistic has either licensed or otherwise "appropriated" Demian Martin's cable charger - don't know which, but if you do some research into the cable charger you will probably get some good info. |
Tubegroover - agreed. I've never said anything about how people should or shouldn't enjoy themselves. I've merely argued about a philosophy. Believe me - I can understand absolutely how a filter set can make a HUGE difference in a setup that wouldn't have otherwise been optimal - essentially "matching the unmatchable" - in those cases filters may make sense - stitching together disparate parts into a recognizeable whole.
But, IMHO, system matching is the first and most important step to building a stellar hi fi, and the match between amplifier and speaker probably the most critical (aside from matching the speaker to the room and vice versa) - I believe that if an amplifier and speaker are well matched, no hocus pocus box could possibly make them better than they would be with high definition boxless audio cables. |
I'm back. Unlike a good bunch of you I don't live on the threads but do enjoy a life outside of this little area of virtuality.
Maxxie - I know your stuff all too well. Been in this game for a long long time and owned many many things. You would do well to forget about how insulted you are and take some decent advice for once.
Far from clueless, kids. You may not like me, or how I say what I have to say - but I speak from a very long time of experience. I've discovered two kinds of people in this business: Music lovers and equipment worshippers. Almost without fail the people that own "magicbox" cables have neatly fallen into the equipment worshipping category. That's just the way it is.
As for my address being "bogus" - it was fine up until two days ago, when I switched it because of some quite nasty emails I was receiving for sharing my personal opinions.
Filterboys - enjoy yourselves. Compromise is compromise is compromise. Magicboxes sound great on systems that need the repair, but veil the performance of a truly well matched high-resolution audio system.
See you in the trenches, ladies.
|
Asa - in answer to your questions
Everything is a filter, for sure. Now - take a $20,000 amplifier, for instance. Of what use is a truly extreme filter (2nd order low pass) to that $20k amp? Well, if it is really useful, then the amplifier manufacturer should have made it $21,000 and put some paralelled caps in to "power factor correct" his amp's obvious flaw.
Un boxed wire vs. boxed wire: Wire is a filter in the same way that water is an acid (or alkaline) - in the presence of real acid (or alkaline) water is just water. Likewise, in the presence of a real filter wire is just wire.
The basis of my opinion has been laid out in several technical arguments here on the thread. Look back and read.
Meanwhile, I've also had experience with Transparent boxes a coupe of years ago, and once had kooky MIT digital cable that had dipswitches on it. Both quite obviously changed things, veiled things in the systems. The Transparent boxes I was running were loudspeaker cables between a Cello Duet 350 and a pair of Avalon Ascents. The digital cable stood between a WADIA 6 and a Muse Model 2. No matter what little setting I chose, it didn't come close to a normal AES/EBU cable.
As far as philosophical methodology: One can arrive at a basically satisfactory result by consistently adding band aids until your system is EQ'd to the point that you no longer hate it. One can also take the efficient approach and seek the help of an experienced pro who can help to match your preamp/amp/speakers. With a good choice in the latter you will get off of the moving sidewalk that has many upgrading and crossgrading forever and just settle into music. In the former, one winds up trying to match the system to the magicboxes often times.
You can't expect to have a high res system with a mid res preamplifier. First order of business is to get a fantastic preamplifier, then have it matched to a fantastic amplifier. Then the only upgrade path you'd be following is the one for speakers. Start small and move up as money allows. No magic box cable is going to turn a $1,000 pair of speakers into a $5,000 pair of speakers, but some folks will wind up blowing another few grand on these magic cables instead of looking for more effective roads to upgrade. |
Ozfly,
I wasn't venemous until venom came a-spittin' at me. At that point I understood that there was a way in which certain people preferred to be communicated to - because they had shown me by their example. I didn't draw the line, I merely came up to it.
Beyond that, it's extremely frustrating to have non technical, faux EE's first try and describe the products as one thing (cable fixers) and then, when the technical argument is presented as to why they couldn't be correct about that, explain the cables as something comepletely different (power factor correctors) - and then be taken to task as to why the new argument/defense is not likely a valid one.
I think the biggest problem is that no one outside of MIT knows what the heck is truly going on inside the boxes, and like good churchgoers they don't bother to demand explanations - they just take the vague ones they are given on faith and evangelize with an incomplete arsenal of bogus theory. |
Sorry Maxgain - I mean gobbledegook that Bob Bundus repeated on this thread. If you don't mind guano in your cables, then its obvious why you don't mind guano being launched from your speakers.
The faithful shake their bibles, do they ever, as if faith were ever an argument that held water. Even G*d didn't think enough of water to do anything more than walk over it...
I don't care what makes Maxxie move around his listening room, but I have been around far too long and experienced far too much in this business to know that most people, most audiophiles, have assembled systems that aren't nearly as properly matched as they can be. This stems largely from the fact that they rarely take the advice of a local sales professional and mostly play mix-n-match with bargain internet sales and blowouts, B-stock, etc.
That's where good'ol "networked" boxes and cables come in to play ... the guy with a poorly matched system would rather spend $ on some cables that might "fix" his component-matching problem than lose $ re-selling the stuff that has caused the problem in the first place.
In my opinion, based on both electrical theory and empirical observation of cables within the genre, I believe that all macigbox cables cause a change in the signal passing through them - a change that would not occur if the signal only passed through the wire itself. I think that's a bad idea and my experience seemed to back that up.
If you like magicbox cables in your system - go in peace. If you hate them and think that they're just a buncha BS - go in peace. I've said my piece and gave my reasons and backed them up.
It always seems to be the weakest of the faithful that shake their bibles at the infidel ... afraid, maybe, that he's speaking the truth and the emperor really is butt ass naked. The true faithful never try to make converts and cast out demons - they just walk in bliss.
So I came to stir the pot - and, boy howdy, did it ever get stirred. It's been fun, senoritas, but I think there's nothing more to say that ain't been said already. Over and over again.
g'bye
k |
