Thiel Owners

jafant,

Thanks to you for continuing to nurture this thread and to help maintain the positive, supportive attitude that makes this the best thread on Audiogon! 

I always enjoy reading what Prof has to say, even though I don't agree with everything he has to say about audio cables. Like Prof, though, my views are not at either extreme in the cable wars because I can't afford to buy super-expensive cables and I don't think that we've figured out the right things to measure in order to be able to rely on measurements alone to know how audio equipments sounds. So I'm not either a price-no-object audiophile or a pure "objectivist." 

I currently have Canare speaker wire (which I terminated myself) connected to my five Thiel PowerPoints in my basement HT system, and I use a range of Belden interconnects with that system. The sound I get with tv and movies in my HT system is very clear and listenable, and I have no burning desire to replace what I have with more expensive cables. However, I have tried a range of cheap to moderately priced cables in my 2-channel system in my living room, and I have had to go slightly beyond my usual "BlueJeans budget" to be happy with the sound from my PS Audio amps and Thiel 2.2 speakers. I'm currently using moderately priced Straight Wire speaker cable and Cardas interconnects.

I respect that Prof has actually listened to many expensive cables and likes his Thiels with Belden wire from BlueJeans cable "better" than may high-priced systems. What that tells me is that he actually hears some differences between systems with different cables, though I don't know if he's tried some of those expensive wires with his own Thiels. Regardless, I'm completely fine with his willingness to use his own ears and reasoned judgment to decide what cables to use with his system. 

Here's where my perspective is a little different. Prof suggests that he prefers using his "neutral-performance" BlueJeans cable rather than searching for cables to function as tone controls, but I take the view that every cable functions as a tone control in some way. Belden cables are certainly not immune to having that issue, and I would not regard them as any more neutral than more expensive cables.

Interestingly, BlueJeans Cable has recently started to offer the Iconoclast line of cables, which has been designed by a now-retired Belden engineer who believed that he could improve on the stock Belden speaker wire and interconnects by making cables that both measured and sounded better. Belden is now making these cables, although the challenges of building the new designs make the cables more expensive. I have not heard them yet in my system, but I hope to at some point to see if they are worth the extra cost for me. It's interesting that even Belden engineers think that their cables can be improved upon.

In my experience, cables can sound different - even when tested blindly - but different is not always better, and system synergy and personal preference play a large role in making cable choices.  

jafant,

Blue Jeans sells two brands of speaker wire: several versions of Belden cable and the Canare 4S11, which is what I use to feed my PowerPoint 1.2 speakers in my HT system. The 4S11 is a "star quad" design with four 14-gauge conductors that can be used for bi-wiring or with the four wires combined into two wires, which is then equivalent to a pair of 11-gauge wires. The 4S11 is good for long runs and can be purchased in bulk, which is what I did. I've heard stories that some cable companies would buy 4S11 in bulk and then dress it up with thick mesh coverings and fancy looking connectors so that it could be sold at dramatically higher prices. I don't know if that story is true, but it sounds like something an unethical cable maker might do.

audiojan,

I'd love to hear those Clear Beyond speaker cables in my system, but they are just too expensive for me to seriously consider. I have a pretty long speaker cable run (7-meter pair) in my 2-channel system, and the list price for a pair of the Clear Beyonds would be $21,470. I paid around $400 for the Straight Wire Encore cables I've used for several decades, so I can't wrap my head around the idea of paying thousands of dollars more to replace the Encores. I could afford the Cardas Parsec speaker wires (at $1575 per 7m pair), but I'd be reluctant to spend more than that, especially without any assurance that they would sound better than my current Straight Wire cables.

I did some in-home testing of moderately priced interconnects last year and ended up liking the Cardas Parsec (in a 1-meter length) better than the Shunyata Venom or similarly priced interconnects from Synergistic Research. I'd be inclined to try a similar speaker cable shoot-out in my system if I could try several samples of wire that were long enough to demo without having to move my amps and source equipment out of their cabinets and across the room.

I'm glad you found some cables that have taken your speakers to a new level.

yabe1951,

I've heard several other people recommend using a tube preamp with a SS power amp to drive Thiel speakers. The last time I seriously listened to any tube gear was many years ago, and I came away liking the liquid midrange but disliking the flabby low end I heard in my demo. I also did not like the idea of having to change tubes and deal with sonic changes as the tubes aged. However, maybe it's time to give a modern tube preamp a chance to impress me.

Prof's comment above got me thinking about another "wings" related quote from "It's a Wonderful Life." Clarence's note to George in the final scene in the movie went something like this:

Dear George:
Remember no man is a failure who has friends and expensive speaker cables.
Thanks for the wings.
Love, Clarence

 

thieliste,

I agree that Cardas cables are a great match for Thiel speakers. I have tried out a lot of interconnects over the past year, but keep returning to Cardas Clear Reflection XLRs for my Thiel 2.2s. These ICs are so smooth and rich sounding while maintaining the imaging and transparency that Cardas cables in the Clear series are known for. If you haven't seen it already, there is a long, glowing review of the CR cables on the Steve Huff Photo website from August.

I've never heard the Clear Beyond cables, and I'd expect them to be great, but the CR cables are still the favorite cables of Angela Cardas, who can use any cables she wants in the Cardas line.

thieliste,

I'd love to see a shootout between Cardas CR and CB cables! There's a significant price difference between those cables, and I'm sure there would be some interesting sound differences as well.

jafant,

I have to laugh after you (and others) encouraged me to get a tube preamp for my Thiel 2.2's and then you picked up a tubeless Ayre integrated amp to drive your Thiels after I broke down and bought a BHK preamp for my system. My BHK still needs more burn-in, but it already sounds great. It adds body to reproduction of instruments and broadens the sound stage in a very pleasing and natural way, but it never sounds flabby or loose the way some tube amps/preamps can sound.

yyzsantabarara,

Congrats on the 3.7s! What finish are they? I'd love to have a pair of those speakers, but my 2.2s look and sound so good in my living room that it's hard for me to justify newer and larger speakers.

And don't let your toddler run the house! If the the 3.7s don't work in the office, just switch rooms with your son and tell him it's about time he got to work and started paying his own way.

jafant,

I'm sure your Ayre amp sounds great. It looks like cable choices are the next big item on your agenda. My experience with cables is fairly limited, but I do have a pretty good feeling for what works in my current system. When I first got the PS Audio Stellar M700 monoblock amps and the Gain Cell DAC/Preamp last year, I settled on using the Cardas Parsec balanced XLRs between the DAC/Pre and the amps after trying several other cables. The Parsec does not produce dramatically etched detail in the upper frequencies, but it does provide a good balance between detail and warmth, and the bass is solid with my 2.2 Thiels. I also picked up several Audience Forte F3 power cords and have been using them with all my PS Audio gear. These Audience cords are a bargain, and they help my system provide a smoother sound with a quieter background compared to the stock cords. Some online comments voice concerns that the Forte cords sound a little soft on the high end, but I don't have a lot to compare them with.

After getting the PS Audio BHK Preamp, I've been using it with the Stellar DAC/Pre in DAC-only mode. This meant that I needed another XLR interconnect between the BHK Pre and the Stellar DAC. If I were being more careful with my audio spending, I would have just picked up another pair of Parsec XLRs, but I've been lusting after the Cardas Clear Reflection XLRs so I decided to try a pair. First the good news: I really like the Clear Reflection cables. And the bad news: I really like the CR cables. This is bad news only because they cost a lot more than the Parsecs do. For now, I'm using the CR from DAC to Pre and the Parsec from Pre to M700s. If my self-control dissolves at some point, I may replace the Parsec with CR. But I still like the Parsec a lot, so there's no hurry to change them out. I'm still undecided about power cords, but I will soon be trying a pair of Shunyata Delta NR V2 power cords on either the BHK Pre and Stellar DAC or on the two M700 monoblocks to compare with the Audience cords. My speaker cables are long runs (24 ft.) of Straight Wire Encore. It's really hard to demo alternative cables that long, and super high-end cables are too expensive in those lengths, so I'll be sticking with the Straight Wire until a better high-performance bargain wire comes along.

A few more comments about the Cardas Clear Reflection interconnects may be helpful. This is not a cable for listeners seeking the nth degree of etched detail, although it does have an extended high end overall. Instead, it is a cable that gets the sound of voices, instruments, and music right. It images great, but not by exaggerating transients or shouting for attention. It simply makes recordings sound like music - at least in my system, which can sound a little too bright with the wrong cables. Because it sounds so natural, the CR is a favorite of many listeners, including several Thiel owners on this thread and Angela Cardas, who has many more expensive cables from Cardas Audio to choose from. If you're looking for some of the "midrange magic" from the earlier Cardas cables combined with the increased clarity from the technology used in Cardas' Clear series of cables, then Clear Reflection would be a great choice. 

tomthiel,

I remembered your previous comments on Morrow cables and was checking out their SP5 speaker cables a couple days ago. Most of the reviews focused on mid and high frequency performance, and there was little mention of bass performance. What's your view of how the Morrow speaker wire handles the low end? Is the SP5 high enough in the Morrow hierarchy to get really good performance or do you need to go to SP6 or higher to achieve sonic satisfaction?

I know that Morrow has frequent sales, but right now they have 50% off on the 5 series cables or higher, which sounds like an especially good deal.

I want to support prof's comments about using tube gear with the 3.7s. I've noticed than ronkent hasn't responded to this discussion yet, but I remember that he was very happy with the sound from his 3.7s when they were driven by a PS Audio BHK Preamp and BHK 250 power amp. My recent addition of a BHK Preamp (with tube input stage and MOSFET output stage) to my M700 monoblocks (class D, with power to spare) has opened up the soundstage and naturalness of the music being produced by my Thiel 2.2s. The 2.2 is definitely an easier load than the 3.7, though, so not every tube or tube/hybrid amp is going to be an ideal match for the 3.7.

I've been looking at getting a streamer/server and have also heard concerns expressed about the Lumin streamers tending toward the dry/analytic side. I spoke to a dealer who sells both Lumin and Innuos gear, and the dealer recommended a Lumin streamer initially until I mentioned that I didn't want anything that might sound too bright with my Thiel speakers. The dealer's recommendation then changed to considering an Innuos Zen server/streamer because the sound was likely to be smoother and more musical. I'm sure that a Lumin can sound great in the right system, but it does make sense to buy from a source with a good return policy if things don't work out as planned.

I've been enjoying the comments and historical perspectives from @unsound and @tomthiel regarding the 3.5s and Thiel's efforts at creating solid and marketable bass. Although I generally like sealed boxes for producing tight bass, I have to agree with @prof that I've really enjoyed the bass performance of Thiel's passive radiators, such as those in my 2.2s.

This discussion got me thinking about my purchase of the 2.2s way back in early 1992, at which time I debated between the 2.2 and the 3.5. Although the 3.5s sounded good, there was something more natural and "together" about the 2.2s - at least to my ears. There was something about the EQ on the 3.5 that I didn't really like. Maybe the ones I heard weren't set up correctly or maybe I had just been brainwashed enough by the critiques of the 3.5 equalizer in TAS and Stereophile, but the 2.2s were a better value in my eyes (and ears). The 2.2s were sleeker, cheaper, and sweeter IMO, and I haven't regretted the choice a bit. And lately I've been finding that upgrades to my amps, preamp, DAC and cables have opened up the sound from the 2.2s further than I could ever have imagined possible. Unless my 2.2s finally succumb to the ravages of old age and can't be repaired, I have no plans to be speaker-hunting in the future.

Just as a note of caution, the direct correlation between SINAD and overall sound quality for amps and DACs has not been established, and I would be careful not to believe everything that Audio Science Review says or implies. Over-interpreting small differences in distortion at levels well below 1% may not be the best way to choose an amp.

Fortunately, the sound quality of audio gear has improved significantly in recent decades compared to the typical amps produced in the 1970's and 80's when Stereo Review's worship of ever lower levels of distortion prompted many audio engineers to design circuits that measured well (at least on standard measurements) but sounded bad. I certainly hope that we don't embrace a future that forgets what we learned in the past.

Measurements of audio gear are important as part of the design process, but designing gear that actually sounds like real music to the human ear/brain should be the ultimate goal.

I think the Thiel Weblog was something that Gary Dayton (from Thiel) managed until it stopped in 2011. I'm not sure why it's still sitting out there in cyberspace, but it's fun to read some of the posts. There's even stuff from Rob Gillum on the blog.

jafant,

I am impressed by your patience in your search for the best cables for your system. As I face my rapidly advancing years, I am finding myself becoming less and less patient in making decisions about my audio gear. I've come to realize that researching gear online is a lot less rewarding than listening to new gear at home, so I'm making faster and more quickly researched decisions. Lately, I've been upgrading my streaming gear, and the music keeps sounding better with each new change. Fortunately, my Thiel 2.2s have welcomed each upgrade and are not holding back my system in any way.

jafant,

Please continue to keep us up-to-date on your cable search. I have to admit that I have not had much luck with Synergistic Research for interconnects or USB cables in comparative demos I've done in my system. However, I know others who love SR wire in their systems, especially when using the more expensive SR offerings.

tomthiel,

I'm only 70, so you have two extra years of knowledge acquisition compared to me. Hope you keep letting interesting ideas seep in. 

Thanks for the thoughts about my 8m cable runs. I've been worried about the long speaker cables, but I can't easily rearrange my multi-purpose living room to move the amps close to the speakers. Most people now seem to recommend going with short speaker cables and long interconnects rather than the other way around, just as you suggested. I spoke to a tech at Cardas about my long speaker runs, and he said that the Parsec cables should work very well at lengths up to at least 30 feet. I hope he's right about this. The Parsec is the latest evolution of the classic Quadlink, which may have been a cable you've come across in one of your previous audio endeavors.

tomthiel,

I am always amazed at the depth of your knowledge of areas in audio where my knowledge is so much more superficial. I'm looking forward to the possibility of upgrading my CS 2.2s when options are available. As I mentioned earlier, the 2.2s are doing a great job of keeping up with some amazing changes in my streaming system, including adding an Innuos Phoenix USB reclocker that just arrived yesterday. 

I've looked at the Morrow speaker cables several times but never taken a chance on ordering them. It seems like all of their models use the same set-up of lots of insulated small wires, with the more expensive models simply having more wires. It's never been clear to me how to decide what the right match for wire density is in my system - so I don't decide. My speaker wire runs are too long (8m) to take a trial lightly, so I haven't.

My current (from the 1990's to today) speaker wire is Straight Wire Encore in a 24-ft pair, but I'm planning to install Cardas Parsec soon. After several comparative trials, I've been using Cardas Clear Reflection balanced interconnects and Shunyata power and USB cables. I can't afford to use the higher-end Cardas speaker cables in my 8m runs so I've chosen the more mid-range Parsec as a compromise. I like that the Parsec uses Star-quad geometry, high-quality Cardas copper, multiple small gauge Litz wires, and even some of the "matched propagation" strategies from the more expensive Cardas wire to equalize timing of the conductors and dielectrics. I've wondered if this focus on timing will especially matter for Thiel speakers.

jafant,

Yes, some of the Synergistic Research products seem too good - or too weird - to be true. I'd have to be working with a friendly dealer to even try them. The latest SR product I tried was a USB cable that was among a group of 5 USB cables from the lending library at the Cable Company. The Synergistic cable had screw-in modules to tune the cable to be warmer or cooler in overall sound. I liked the imaging of the cable, but it seemed to emphasize "air" at the higher frequencies at the expense of the bass, The group of cables I tried included "mid-priced" cables from Cardas, Audience, Synergistic, Stealth, and Shunyata. I ended up buying the Shunyata Alpha, which is pretty high-priced in my world, but far lower priced than the Shunyata Sigma or Omega models.

I think you're right to question where in the chain to try to fix or compensate for problems in music reproduction. It would seem to make sense to fix things as far upstream as possible, but that isn't always easy to do. 

With regard to Nelson Pass, I watched a YouTube video of an interview he did with Steve Guttenberg that mentioned the distortion profile issues briefly. Nelson was careful to state that he didn't actually add second or third harmonic distortion to some of his amps. Instead, he simply chose not to suppress those lower order distortions as much as he could have in the circuit design. 

For my own listening, I don't look at ultra-low distortion specs in an amp as a sign of sonic purity if those specs are associated with any harshness or brightness in the sound quality I hear at the downstream end of the chain. But adding in a lot of extra distortion doesn't seem like an ideal design strategy either.    

tomthiel - When I checked BJ's SDI section, they showed BNC connections as the only option for the 4694R cable. I assume they will terminate with RCAs if you call in a special order.

@unsound  Thanks for helping me understand some of the intricacies of the CS3.5 EQ and providing some clues toward what's happening in the evolving world of Class D amplification. I agree that Bruno Putzeys has been the brain behind many of the most important advances in modern Class D electronics, so it's interesting that he hasn't yet jumped on the GaNFET bandwagon. From what I've read, it appears that most of Bruno's work continues to use MOSFETs instead of GaNFETs. We'll see if that changes in the future.

For the present, I'm generally happy with the Class D PSA M700 monoblocks powering my Thiels, but I think it's likely that newer Class D offerings will sound even better and cope with low impedance loads more effectively - even in speakers that present a less benign impedance profile than do my CS2.2s. 

jafant,

I'm glad you are still carefully considering a range of cable options for your system. I seem to remember that you were going to arrange another demo of SwissCables sometime soon. Is that still going to happen?

I am very happy with the Cardas Clear Reflection XLRs I'm using between my DAC and preamp and between my preamp and monoblocks, which drive my Thiel 2.2 speakers. The Clear Reflection cables provide a good degree of detail without being hyper-resolving. They also allow a very natural fullness or richness to flow from my system. I'm no longer experiencing significant listening fatigue, even with older, poorly recorded music, and well-recorded music sounds fantastic.

I'm still thinking, though, that I may be able to improve on my speaker cables a bit. I'm currently using Cardas Parsec speaker cables, which are decent for the price but are positioned in the middle of the current Cardas line. I'd like to try Clear Reflection speaker cables, but the cost for a 26-foot run is out of my price range. So now I'm looking at the possibility of reducing the length of my speaker cables to a more reasonable 8 feet by using longer (18 foot) XLRs between my preamp and amps. This change would allow me to try some higher end speaker wire without breaking the budget. A pair of 18-foot Clear Reflection interconnects would be quite expensive, though, so I've been considering trying some pro-audio XLR interconnects made with Grimm TPR wire if I were to move my amps closer to the 2.2s but farther away from the rest of my audio equipment. The cost would be less than $150 for a pair of Grimm XLRs. 

Have you or any other Thiel owners ever tried pro-audio interconnects like the Grimm with any success?

jafant,

Hope you find the perfect cables for your system soon. By the way, I noticed that the same dealers that carry SwissCables also often carry the Swedish Qln speakers, which appear to be getting lots of positive reviews. I saw that the Qln speakers are designed with time-aligned drivers, but I'm not sure they use the first-order crossovers used in Thiels. Have you ever heard any of the Qln models or know anything more about them?

yyz,

I appreciate your detailed comments that support the use of pro audio cables in some, but not all, situations. Your success in using 15-foot Benchmark XLRs between preamp and amp is encouraging, but it sounds like a demo first would definitely be in order for my system.

tomthiel,

Thanks for your comments regarding pro audio cables (like Mogami and Benchmark) compared to your reference Straight Wire and Benchmark cables. I've been worried that pro audio cables may not sound quite as good in some ways compared to some more expensive options designed for for home audio, and your comments suggest that this may be a valid concern.

jafant,

Yes, please let us know what you think about the Qln Prestige 5s when you have a chance to hear them.

ydjames,

It's great to hear from someone who has heard the Qln Prestige 3 in several systems. I'm still very much committed to my Thiel 2.2s, especially when I think about how much it would cost to replace my Thiels with anything that would sound as good. However, I'm always on the lookout for great-sounding back-up options to consider if my 2.2s develop problems that can't be easily repaired.

I'll have to look into the Tellurium Q cables as I explore ongoing cable options.

tomthiel,

I share your concerns about "pro" vs. "high-end" cable controversies. I've had a chance to compare Belden 1800F XLRs to several "mid-end" interconnects, and I much prefer other cables to the Beldens. In my system, the Beldens are a bit harsh sounding, with lack of fullness in the bass and an overall lack of refinement. I haven't listened to the Benchmark XLRs, but they apparently use Canare Star Quad L-4E6S wire with Neutrik connectors. In reading cable discussions by several pro audio folks on a pro gear forum, I've noticed that many of them prefer Grimm TPR to any of the Mogami, Canare, or Belden wire, and some seem to feel that star-quad XLRs don't sound as good as other geometries in situations where going all-out to reduce noise is not a major requirement. Lately, I've seen positive comments about Vovox unshielded wire and a new cable from GhostCables designed to sound better than Grimm while not costing as much as Vovox.

As far as long XLRs go, I may try a Grimm TPR pair or possibly the new GhostCables XLRs to see how they perform compared to my current Cardas Clear Reflection XLRs. I'll post some comments if I decide to invest the $150 needed to buy an 18-foot pair of "pro" XLRs. I guess that's a pretty small investment in the interest of advancing my own personal home version of "cable science."

tomthiel,

Your comments on the Vovox cable are very interesting. Have you ever tried using unshielded Vovox as an interconnect between preamp and amp?

tomthiel,

Just as you are happy with your Morrow interconnects, I'm very happy with my Cardas Clear Refection XLRs. I'm running one Cardas XLR between my DAC and preamp and another between my preamp and amp. Both XLRs are short (.75-1.0 meter). As I mentioned before, my problem is that I would need an 18-foot XLR pair (for the pre to amp run) if I change my set-up from "short XLR - long speaker cable" to a "long XLR - short speaker cable" arrangement.  I either need to spend thousands on a long Clear Reflection XLR or a few hundred on a high-quality pro cable of the same length.

My best bet may be to buy 2-3 short pro cables (e.g.,Vovox, Grimm, and/or Ghost) to compare to my Clear Reflections and decide which one to order in a longer length. If I go that route, I'll post my impressions here.

Thanks again for your comments!

tomthiel,

I wanted to follow up with you based our July discussion of pro audio mic cables used as interconnects for home audio use. You asked me to share any new info from my in-home demo of a few popular balanced cables from the pro audio world. So here's where I'm at:

As I've mentioned before, I currently use Cardas Clear Reflection balanced XLRs (in 1m lengths) between my PS Audio DirectStream DAC and a BHK preamp and then between the preamp and my M700 monoblock amps. The Cardas CR cables sound great, but I'm planning to switch to using longer interconnects (at least 5m) so that I can significantly shorten my runs of speaker wire. Ideally, I'd like to find an XLR cable that sounds great but isn't too expensive in a 5-meter length.

After reading about several highly regarded balanced interconnect/mic cables on a major pro audio forum, I bought 1m lengths of Grimm TPR and Vovox Sonorus Direct S (unshielded) to compare in my home system. Although these cables are considered a bit expensive within the pro audio world, they are substantially cheaper than balanced XLRs in the audiophile market. I've listed my impressions of these cables below, with the caveat that this is how they sound to me in my own system with each cable connected between the preamp and amp (with a Cardas CR upstream between the DAC and preamp). Listening was preceded by 48 hours of initial break-in, but I can't rule out the possibility of changes in sound after further break-in. Music sources were WAV files played back via USB from an Innuos Zen Mk3 server or streamed tracks from Qobuz also played back through the Zen. An Innuos Phoenix was used between the Zen and the DAC, with USB cables from Shunyata and DH Labs.

Maybe my expectations about the Grimm TPR were too high, but I was somewhat disappointed by what I heard. It's not that the cable sounded bad, it's just that it sounded a bit veiled as if it was softening any exaggerated transients or edginess to produce a pleasant sound. This effect tended to suck the life out of the music. In contrast, my usual Cardas CR was smooth and musical while still allowing a lot of detail and "life" to come through. The Grimm did create a solid center image for voices, but the width of the soundstage was narrowed a bit compared to other XLRs I've heard. 

The sound of the Vovox Sonorus was markedly different! The Vovox was much more open, lively, and "real" sounding in my system. More detail was reproduced, but the sound was not harsh or etched. In some systems, I suspect the Vovox could become a little bright on poor recordings, but on my system this was not a problem (possibly due to the Phoenix USB reclocker and the Cardas CR in the upstream path). For me, the Vovox always seemed very musical, and live recordings seemed especially "alive." Voices and individual instruments stood out in their own spaces while still blending together naturally. Compared to the Cardas, the Vovox was a bit brighter while the CR was smoother, sweeter, and a bit more refined. Listening fatigue was not a problem with either the Vovox or the Cardas in my system.

Given that a 5-meter XLR pair of the Cardas CR would cost nearly 10x the cost of the Vovox, I'm seriously considering adding a 5m Vovox pair to my system in place of the CR cables between the preamp and amps. This change would add a bit of Vovox's liveliness to my existing system and would set me up well to upgrade to shorter (and possibly more expensive) speaker cables. And after all, my Thiel 2.2 speakers deserve the best cables I can afford. 

 @jafant I also wanted to urge you to take a look/listen at the Vovox Sonorus as part of your cable quest. I know you've been able to demo some Swisscables already, but here's another Swiss cable (from a different company) you shouldn't miss.

jafant,

I got my Vovox cables from ProAudioLA. They typically deal with online orders, but they do have people who answer the phone if you have questions. I think they do have an actual store in California, but I don't live in that part of the country.

For most cables, they buy the wire in bulk and terminate the cables themselves (with a lifetime guaranty). For Vovox cables, all the terminations are done in Switzerland by Vovox, and the finished cables are shipped to U.S. dealers for sale over here. 

By the way, I've read a lot of pro audio engineers who post online saying that the Vovox Sonorus is the cable to demo for sound engineers who don't think that cables make a difference. Vovox also makes a more expensive line of cables that I have not heard, and I don't know who carries them.

jafant,

I don't know whether I will try a full loom of Vovox at this point. If I do decide to get a 5-meter pair of Vovox Sonorus interconnects to make the change to a "longer XLR - shorter speaker cable" set-up, I will then have my current 1m Vovox XLRs to try between DAC and preamp, combined with new 5m Vovox XLRs between preamp and amps. If that arrangement sounds better than the Cardas-Vovox combination I'm using now, I will eventually go that route. For now, I'm going to live with the combo XLRs for a while to be sure that works for me long-term. I have heard that the Vovox XLRs don't change in sound much between shorter and longer lengths, so I'm assuming the 1m Vovox will have the same sound signature as a 5m Vovox. I haven't tried any other Vovox wire so I don't know how their power cables, speaker cables, etc. would sound in my system.

In my reading of pro audio forums, I have seen a few comments that support the use of Vovox Sonorus interconnects selectively rather than at all stages of the recording/mastering process. I guess some users think that the clarity and openness of the Vovox can be "too much of a good thing" when used throughout the process. On the other hand, some users have wired their entire studios with Vovox and rave about how "live" it sounds. I know that Tom Thiel really likes Vovox Sonorus as a mic cable in recordings he has made.

I mentioned earlier that Vovox has a more expensive cable line (called Excelsus). They also have a less expensive line called Link. All three lines (Link, Sonorus, and Excelsus) include both shielded and unshielded cables. The unshielded cables tend to sound better as long as extensive noise rejection is not needed.

dsper,

You asked about the basic system components I used to demo the Vovox Sonorus XLR cables described in my 9-7-21 post. I use a DirectStream DAC, BHK Preamp, and M700 Mono amps (all from PS Audio). Speakers are Thiel CS 2.2. I do most of my listening via Qobuz streaming or playing WAV files ripped from CD and stored on an Innuos Zen Mk3 server/streamer. The Ethernet feed into the Zen first goes through a Network Acoustics ENO filter and streaming cable to reduce noise. The USB feed to my DAC goes first through an Innuos Phoenix USB reclocker. I'm using Shunyata Alpha and Network Acoustics USB cables. I use Cardas Clear Reflection balanced XLRs from DAC to preamp and preamp to amps. Speaker cables are Cardas Parsec.

I hope this info is helpful. Good luck in your search for "live sparkle."

jafant,

I've had the Vovox in and out of my system over the past few weeks. I haven't decided if I want to live long-term with the smoothness of the Cardas Clear Reflection or the sparkle of the Vovox Sonorus interconnects. When I have time to listen carefully, I'm going to try the Vovox between my DAC and preamp instead of between the preamp and amps to see how that changes the sound. 

For digital signal handling, I had been running a DH Labs USB cable from the Innuos Phoenix to the DAC, but I recently replaced the DH Labs with a Network Acoustics USB Cable III. The new NA USB sounds a bit more open and clear than the DH Labs USB without sounding as bright. I'm still running a Shunyata Alpha USB from the Innuos Zen Mk3 to the Phoenix, but I may switch the two USB cables around to see if the sound changes in a way that sounds even more musical.

I continue to be surprised at how much the sound of my system can change with just a little bit of cable shuffling.

I hope you're making progress in your cable search.

jafant,

"Interesting" is a good way to describe the evolution of my cable selection. At this point, I am unlikely to use a full loom of any one cable brand in my system. I guess I've kind of standardized on Shunyata for power cables and Cardas for analog signal cables. My digital cables are more of a mix. 

My choice of analog cables has been strongly influenced by trying to avoid cables that make the music sound too bright or harsh. Brightness has tended to result in rapid listening fatigue for me, which has led me to trade away a bit of high frequency detail for smoothness/sweetness in the overall sound. However, as I have gradually reduced noise in my digital signal chain (using an ENO filter for Ethernet and an Innuos Phoenix reclocker for USB), I have experienced a more relaxed sound that allows for greater detail retrieval without producing listening fatigue. This has allowed me to consider cables that I would not have considered in the past.

Fortunately, I'm pretty happy with the overall sound of my system right now, so my cable explorations are focused on tweaking the sound rather than starting over from scratch.

If I remember correctly, you're using Ayre equipment in your system. Is that an integrated amp with a built-in DAC? If so, do you use your CD players as transports or have them send an analog signal to your amp? Just trying to figure out if you're relying on any digital cables that would also be part of your search for reference cables.

For Thiel speakers placed on pad- and carpet-covered plywood floors (on 16" centers), is there any consensus that it is better to couple the speakers to the floor using spikes or better to decouple the speakers from the floor using springs or similar isolation products. Or is it simply a matter of choice based on the "sound" of the floor and the user's preference for tighter but leaner bass versus looser but fuller-sounding bass? 

prof,

Thanks for the detailed information about your speaker isolation "experiments." This is exactly the type of info I was looking for. In your system and room, what specific sonic differences have you noticed between the use of the standard Thiel spikes versus placement of spikeless speakers directly on the carpeted floor?

I'm presuming that the spikes would couple the speakers more directly to the wood floor while eliminating the spikes would allow the carpet and foam pad to "slightly" decouple the speakers from the wood floor without losing the density and realism you're trying to achieve. Or maybe that isn't how it actually works. Any further clarification of your findings would be very helpful.

prof,

Thanks for your additional comments, even if if you're not completely sure about the spike vs. spikeless comparison. It's helpful when you say that you don't remember the spikes changing the sound much.

For my Thiel 2.2 speakers, I may just let inertia (i.e., being lazy and cheap) shape my decisions about trying any new speaker isolation products. If I decide to do my own evaluation of the spike vs. spikeless set-up, it won't cost me a thing since I'm already using the spikes.

I know what you mean about how hard it is to move the speakers with the spikes in place, If I eventually decide to remove them, I would be able to fine-tune speaker placement more easily - so that is a factor to consider as well.

Again, thanks for sharing your experience with speaker isolation. I hope your speakers continue to sound great!  

@tomthiel   I know you have a lot of experience using the Benchmark AHB-2 with Thiel CS-2.2 speakers, and I'm hoping you can answer two questions about the AHB-2:

1. Are you satisfied that the AHB-2 has sufficient power to drive the 2.2s with ease in stereo mode under any real-world listening conditions in a medium sized room?

2. Do you know what kind of distortion profile the AHB-2 has in relation to second and third harmonics compared to higher order harmonics?

Distortion profile is an issue that Nelson Pass has studied a lot in relation to Class A and A/B amps, and it is also being discussed in relation to Atma-Sphere's new Class D amp that uses GaN-FETs. The Atma-Sphere amp is supposed to have the sweetness of a tube amp with lower distortion, greater transparency, and better masking of higher order distortions. The Atma-Sphere amp has similar power ratings to the Benchmark amp at both 8 and 4 ohms.

@tomthiel   Thanks for the detailed response to my questions. You may consider yourself an electronics layman, but you still know a lot more about this stuff than I do.

Given that the 2.2 appears to be easier to drive than the 3.7, it sounds like the AHB-2 should have enough power to handle my 2.2s if I decide to try one. (By the way, my room is about 3800 cubic feet, though with some large openings on two sides.)

I'm still trying to learn more about the distortion profiles of amps and their audible effects. The Benchmark website has a lot of interesting info on its products, and I even understand some of it. Jon Siau at Benchmark talks about providing electronic compensation to reduce second and third harmonic distortions (through their DAC, I think) as part of the attempt to reduce all types of distortion as much as possible. In contrast, Nelson Pass says that his listening tests at Pass Labs have shown a general preference by many listeners for the sound of amps that don't work too hard to suppress lower order distortions. Ralph Karsten at Atma-Sphere says that second and third harmonic distortion is not annoying to most listeners and actually helps mask the higher order distortions that give so many solid-state amps a harsh or overly bright sound. Siau, Pass, and Karsten are all highly regarded designers who use both measurements and listening tests to design their amps.

On the surface, it would seem best to reduce all distortions as much as possible, and this appears to be part of Siau's approach. On the other hand, there seems to be general agreement that the harmonics in recorded music reproduction are not identical to the natural harmonics in real-life musical instruments. This raises the question whether sound would seem most natural and real if all distortions are as low as possible or if the harmonics profile of the gear used to play back recorded music needs to come closer to matching the harmonics profile of real instruments. This sounds like a situation that will demand some actual listening!

Thanks again for your help in thinking some of this through.

@tomthiel 

Thanks so much for the additional info about the Benchmark amp in your system and room. I think my room is a little smaller than yours, which could affect the amp-speaker match a bit. My current amps are the PSA M700 monoblocks, which have plenty of power and sound really good, too. Your S300 is a lower powered stereo sibling of the M700, and I wondered how the CS3.5 works with the S300 compared to the Benchmark amp. 

I may not be remembering this correctly and it may not apply to the Benchmark amp anyway, but I thought that most stereo amps in bridge mode didn't handle lower impedance loads as well as the stereo version did (which could make it a less good match with the CS2.2). It also seems like the use of EQ down to 20 Hz with the CS3.5 could require quite a bit of juice from an amp, and the non-EQ'd CS2.2 wouldn't require as much power from any amp.

It would be fun to compare my M700s to the AHB-2 directly, but I remain more fascinated with how the new Atma-Sphere Class D amp might sound with my CS2.2s. The A-S amp uses GaN-FETs and is rated at 200 w/channel at 4 ohms. I won't be attending AXPONA next week, but I'll be looking for comments on the sound of the A-S amp at the show before I decide whether to try to demo any of these options.

Thanks again for all your input!  

@tomthiel, thanks for the additional info! I hope you enjoy your new Benchmark gear. I'll look forward to your more detailed comments on the extra load of the EQ for the CS3.5, especially with respect to what @unsound mentioned about dealing with the impedance "bump" in the low bass.

@unsound, thanks for the discussion of the comparison between Figure 1 and Figure 3 in the Stereophile article on the CS3.5. Does the impedance rise vs. the EQ boost in the low bass fully offset the extra demands for more power when the EQ is used? If an amp puts out only 100 w/channel into 8 ohms, wouldn't available power drop even lower when the impedance goes above 8 ohms?   

@unsound, I forgot to ask you about the new generation of Class D amps you're waiting for. Are there any specific amps or modules that might be especially promising?

@tomthiel  Thanks for keeping us updated on your recent changes in cables and electronics as you look to optimize the functioning of the CS3.5 EQ. I agree with your suggestion to @Big_Greg to try the Benchmark cables to see if they reduce his concerns about brightness with his Thiel speakers - at least when reproducing music from vinyl - but I would also suggest that he try several other different interconnects and speaker cables as well. My experience has been that Thiel speakers (even my CS2.2s) can be pretty revealing of differences between cables and electronic gear. That's a good thing if you find a good cable match, but a problem if you don't.

For my own listening, I'm trying to find the best balance between high frequency air and detail, midrange fullness and realism, and low end impact without boominess. I'm also trying to achieve excellent imaging while minimizing listening fatigue. I've been generally happy with Cardas cables (like Clear Reflection) that blend the classic Cardas midrange liquidity with the high-end detail of the newer cables in the Cardas line. I don't get concerned when I read about listeners who are looking for uber detail and think that Clear Reflection softens detail too much. Not every listener has the same gear or the same preferences.

I've tried several interconnects (including Vovox Sonorus and Zavfino Fusion) that provide nice high frequency detail and natural tone, as well as seemingly adequate low-end heft, but I've found that over time they just sounded a little too thin and lacking in the richness, fullness, and coherence of the Clear Reflections. I'm not suggesting that everyone should use the cables I use, but I am suggesting that everyone should at least demo a range of cables to see what sounds best with their gear and their preferences. Thiel speakers are revealing enough to show off cable differences, so Thiel owners already have that going for them.

@tomthiel  I'll look forward to your take on the Iconoclast cables. I haven't tried any of their speaker cables, but I have tried the Gen 2 XLR interconnects in the TPC and OFE copper versions. Even though those two cables measured virtually identically in terms of inductance, capacitance, and resistance, they each sounded different in my system. The TPC sounded more lively and a bit more forward and "in your face," while the OFE sounded more closed in, less forward, and kind of uninvolving. I wish I had tried the OCC copper instead, but I resisted due to the higher cost. Most listeners seem to rave about the OCC, although I think Galen (the designer) considers the TPC to be the best value.