"Great RCA interconnects under $100?"


Is it possible to get really good sound from a $100 or less interconnect? I have worked with some very good cables from Acoustic Zen and Harmonic Technology. I now want to experiment with the other end of the price spectrum. Would like to hear your opinions on these or any other cables that list for $100 or less NEW. No cheating by saying you can buy it used for under $100, OK?
Here is my short list of $100 or less interconnects: Signal Cable Analog Two, DH Labs BL I, Better Cables Silver Serpent, Audio Art IC-3, VooDoo Opus 1, Fro-Zen Stellar Labs, Harmonic Technology Harmony Link, Analysis Plus Oval One.
tube540
Never thought I'd start a "what watch do you wear" thread, but there you go!
Just for closure, I wear a $150 Casio (big bells & whistles model) that only gains 4 second per month; not bad huh?
Time to go listen to some music I think...
$100.00 is not really enough to even build your own SOTA cable. Four quality RCA connectors start at $50.00 and up.
I'd vote for Silent audio Apollo cables silver or copper (A or C), if you can find them. I have not seen them advertised on audiogon for a while. Looked inexpensive were inexpensive but sounded better than most interconnects at many times their price.
However there is a problem with the recording studio analogy.
So you have a band, mics, cables, monitors, more cables and a mixer to a recording device. Yes you have a guy tweeking he tones in most cases. The EQ going to the recorder may not be the same sound as the players in the room, right? But in cases of electronics, there doesn't have to be sound in the room, maybe they are all under headphones. Starting to see what doesn't matter? The amp used may not bring out the true sound of that instrument. :)
It doesn't matter what the sound in the room, it doesn't matter the sound in the mixer, monitors amps, or hearing specs of any golden eared teck or deafened guitarist or anyone in betwee.
We do not have the luxury often to compare the event of that performance to the recording that comes out the other end. But, our event statrts from the recording, vinyl, disc, tape, or (sticking with hard media) the recorded product.
So no matter what lens the photographer used to shoot that tree, clear or fuzzy, that has nothing to do with us after.
Look at Santana Abraxas, or Rolling Stones Let it Bleed. Those mics are hishy. there are loads of well meaning recordings that due ot label, time, budget, or whatever are awful.
No matter. We are given the media we have. So from there, yes it is subjective to ear, equipment, room (maybe?). But what the engineer used though interesting is not our concern. Unless we want to engage in more of our "chasing" which all of us do as in the Conditions of the tubes discussion above. I've done it, and will again. But including that, in the equation will require more coffee as the energyy to compensate what was used prior to product to get to the "truth" is a near impossible task. "toss a dart" to pick one is a good place to start, maybe. But it depends what you want. If you like more mids go copper. If you like more detail go silver. If you like mids with a sharper forward edge go silver over plain copper. . If you like detail and warmth the gold over silver. There are grades of copper, and silver that make a difference. Yes, I've put in the R&D to make plain cables under $100 that sound to most like much more expensive cables. Please forgive typos.
>> 04-23-07: Tvad
>> I chose a battery Omega Seamaster after my Seamaster
>> chronometer was stolen. The battery version keeps
>> outstanding time, unlike its chronometer brother,
>> although the battery version isn't as secretly sexy.
I'm sorry to read about your episode of your SeMPC. I'm looking @ mine on my wrist & yes it does look very "secretly sexy"!! :) that James Bond 007 fellow had/has good taste, no? (I know, I know!)
I know what you mean by not keeping great time. But, hell, that secret sexy look is worth it! :-)