If you DON”T believe in nice speaker wire or interconnects please don't come into this thread

I purchased some 8 gauge custom banana terminated cables on ebay for $100. Am I allowed in this thread?

 

That's great and all.

But how do you feel about tequila and/or dogs - in no particular order?

 

That I accept as fact for the most part. People prefer different types of distortion. This is where we diverge: in the full palette of distortions any difference in the cable's delta distortion would be drowned out by electronics, speakers, etc.
My opinion
No judgement, no right or wrong

 

Shielding will be reflected in C, so will construction: twist, number of conductors, etc.
They use those techniques to MANIPULATE C, L
Ever notice on HV power lines every so many towers they may transpose phases? This mitigates some L.

RFI on speaker level signals is so far down as to be inaudible (although measurable).

If by Supra you mean a car, yes, between HID's and HV electronic ignition you are talking 20k spikes.
HID 25kV to strike the arc
Ignition >25 kV and is striking 1000's / minute, sometimes a few times per piston per cycle.

in older cars with coils they used a ballast resistor or shielded plug wires.

 

While I will never be mad at a Toyota Supra reference on an audio forum, here I think he was talking about Supra cables, which are (IMO) another value-based cable company like BJC. Maybe they make more expensive stuff now but I know them from very early, cost-effective USB cables when the PC audiophile crowd was trying to manage the power + signal + no error correction nature of USB audio interconnection.

 

Looks like those go for approx $450-$750 used today. The network boxes were for frequency roll off and correct phase at the end of the cable. Dealers liked them for extended bass response.

 

Ah yes, MIT!! I had several iterations of MIT speaker cable and interconnects. I still have a pair of MIT 770 Twin Terminator interconnects. I always loved MIT for how fully saturated the MIT "sound" was without being cloying or euphonic. People used to sneer they were euphonic. I would consider that for a moment and then ask them when was the last time they'd been in a concert hall hearing a symphonic performance and the answer was "I never go to symphonic concerts." Well, that immediately illuminated, in my mind, their lack of insight about the orchestral "colors" of instrumental choirs. It also explained why they liked the Krell electronics of the '80s, which were tonally dark and gray, but had astounding bass (if you ignored that not all bass should sound closed in and devoid of harmonics on bass drums and big cymbal crashes). They had a lot of company back then. And still do, from what I read.

The MIT came very, very close to real life in the same way Whitney Houston's voice was utterly beautiful and sounded akin to the actual tonality of acoustic instruments. MIT came closer to that than anyone else's interconnect/speaker cable I'd heard (this was in the '80s and '90s), I have Nordost interconnects now, and even as wonderful as they are, they do not have the tonality of the MITs from the 1980s. Of course, I have different electronics, too: Conrad Johnson, Audio Research, the astounding Antique Sound Lab Hurricanes and my trusty NAD C325BEE, 326BEE and 356BEE integrated amps. I love those integrateds, except for the 356, which has less of the fleshed out tonality of the 325 and '26. I wondered, after owning it for a while, if NAD was going for more "neutral." If so, they threw out a bit of the baby with the bathwater. It's just the slightest bit bleached).
The MIT, when heard with, say, The Mercury Living Presence Nutcracker Suite (LP OR CD), which is gloriously beautiful in tonality, would have you swooning, so gorgeous was the sound.

I'd buy MIT just to hear it, but I'm at the end of a buying spree I swore (to myself) myself last year I wouldn't even do (I lied to myself!) It all started with that damn Hana ML cartridge and then I just had to hear what it could sound like with superior electronics and speakers. And now I know what they sound like with superior electronics. And speaker cables. And speakers. And interconnects. And everything else. I'm sure to be living in an old folks' home soon enough after those expenditures. (The devil made me do it!) I'd still like to hear what MIT sounds like nowadays. I've heard several of the others (had Transparent MM2 Ultra speaker cable, but eventually realized i was closed in at the top and slowed down the music's transients, and consequently, the rhythm and boogie of the music. But that was 7 or 8 years ago), but have stuck with my Shunyata upper level cables. But that MIT sound was the closest to the sound of a real musical instrument I ever heard. If Nordost was so superlative in other ways, I'd try out MIT. And even their less expensive cables have that "house" sound: sheerly musical as it is in real life.

 

Yes but you need to go through the initiation ritual which will commence as soon as you voice your opinion.

 

I wonder if part of the price represents a collectable value or it is just the plain current value as a cable?

 

What's in the little boxes?
Filters?
Transformers?
Magic?

seriously, some network to match the impedance s of the connected devices?

anyone ever crack one open or measure it?

 

Someone already answered that in another thread, one of the following:
a) unicorn secretions
b) ground up Audioquest plugs
c) phenolic resin (but tuned phenolic resin)

 

I guess those banned from this thread are those who believe in disgusting wire.

 

What were you using before? Do the new ones sound different?
What kind of Interconnects do you like?
What have you listened to and describe what you thought?
This is the Information the person that started the thread wants.

As far as for Interconnects. Ive used Mostly MIT interconnects for many years and recently switched to JPS Labs which I like because of their clarity and neutrality. The MIT's were for Tube Gear (SET's) I had before I switched to all Solid State.
Id recommend Analysis Plus too.
Budget?
But honestly Id call the guys at Used Cable and ask them. They have a HUGE database so they can help you match better. Ask for Steve. Its Free to call and way more informative than this Group that's for sure!

 

I found a pic of one. It looks like an encapsulated filter/divider for the hi/lo biwire outputs.

Wouldn't that just add complication/distortion?

The speaker filter would do the same thing.
You've added more phase shift. Perhaps to offset inherent cable phase shift?
They do that on power lines to increase power factor: ratio of real power to (total = real + reactive). Her you need to add L, same for power lines.

But it does not matter if all freqs are shifted the same, and they are, 90 deg since C >>R
Phase RELATIONSHIP remains constant
Like a group delay

 

As stated above, there are/were videos where people dissect the box. Here's a pic from Google search.


I owned them close to 20 years ago. Don't recall anything about them other than their size and weight.

 

A friend gave me some "Nice" speaker wire that I use to connect my Mac MC40 monoblocks to my Altec speakers. Copper stranded and fairly heavy gauge. Looks like old Monster speaker cable with the clear PVC jacket that is still in great shape. Can't see any reason to upgrade.
I have a box full of interconnects that I have collected over the years. Pretty much all of the co-axial design. Never noticed any difference between different sets so I use the ones that reach without being to long.
Being a tech and having a back ground in electronics I understand what can influence a cable design. I use what is technology correct for the application. I don't try to influence the sound by using cables that might add extra capacitance or resistance.
I'm sure that some cables might sound "different" but why does that equal better? Remember, different is easy, better not so easy.

BillWojo

 

I'm going to invent wire that asserts a phase shift 180 degrees out of phase with the one your speaker imparts, net 0 phase shift. That way the amp will see a purely resistive load. I may also add or subtract Z (series or parallel) to normalize at 8 Ohm (user selectable).

If I can do it on a power line by adding shunt or series L or shunt C why not for speaker cable?
ummm, wait, power is only 1 freq, 60 Hz ( US).

And since:
Xc = 1/(2 Pi f C) and Xl = 2 Pi f L , it might be complicated for f = 20 to 20000 Hz.
Not to mention speaker |Z| and phase angle are very non-linear with f. And every speaker is a bit different, plus what about 3 ways?!

I'll convert the signal to the digital domain and back!

Oh well, not getting rich today

 

I Love 3-ways. Just Say'in.

 

They were more expensive new I think. Size of the network usually equaled price. Those are pretty big! I have Transparent Music Wave and IC's. All with networks. Similar concept although I think the Transparents are inline vs MIT not. I don't care about the networks but the Transparents are my best sounding cables at any rate.

 

I should never say never but I don't get too carried away by boxes attached to cables. Still, even at those second hand prices the MIT are not dirt cheap so I suppose there is a good reason people still buy them. I haven't heard either brand but good to know what the box was all about, thank you!

 

If I was a cable magnate I could have one...

j/k, no desire, just ask the twins who were nurses

 

Why not just switch the +/- on one speaker?

 

I might be totally wrong. At any rate, they used to be the go to for the ultra high end. I think they have a $50,000 pair of speaker cables today. "Terminator" was the moniker for their stuff.

 

Speaker Cables Archives - MIT Cables - Music Interface Technologies

Range is $999 to $120,000

 

And I used to think the Kimber Kable "The Black Pearl" was the most expensive a cable would ever get.

Yeesh.

I do love Kimber though.