They used to. It looks like they don’t with the new website redesign, bummer. My Cardas Neutral Reference cables are listed as 9.7 pF/foot in a balanced configuration and my Cardas Golden Reference are listed as 7 pF/foot: Cardas Audio Cardas Audio
Their old brochures had even more info. Eg., 109 individual Litz wires in the Golden Reference, https://www.audiofreaks.co.uk/af2021/cms-files/2021/10/1635678487_cardas-brochure.pdf
Yeah that’s better. Why he doesn’t list resistance except for one cable is strange. All the other specs are pretty darn great.
For reference, I am comparing them to Transparent Musiclink ($200/m), Audioquest Sidewinder ($75/m). For speakers, I swapped in the 3103's in place of Transparent Musicwave. I just listened with my old Emotiva phono section last night but am awaiting my Darlington Labs upgraded unit to finish the deal for now. What I heard with Mogami (2549/3103) was a really smooth sound with no glaring midrange and seemingly louder output than before. Good clarity and strong bass. 3 pairs of 2549/Amphenol and 3103(10ft pair) with some fancy extras all cost about $250 from Performance Audio. They did the terminations/jackets etc..
Ugh. Audioquest. has zero specs for their cables. Ridiculous. i mean here they quote all this technology and what it does…….and zero measurements to back up any of those claims. Just ridiculous Robin Hood SILVER (ZERO) · Folk Hero Series · Speaker Cables · Cables
Couldn't agree more. I had some AudioQuest cables in the past. One of the few true wastes of money I've ever committed...
I mean the most ridiculous thing is that their literature for their cables is peppered in technology claims. RF noise, capacitance, directional copper, blah blah blah. And not ONE measurement of any of these variables which THEY quote in their claims. that’s pretty ballsy
Yes, what also bugs me is the claims about materials used. I mean, it's about transmitting an electrical signal, so the electrical properties resulting from the physical properties are what matters - not the physical properties themselves. The main reason I bought some AudioQuest cables was simply because of the mantra "you have to try it first before having an opinion". But unfortunately, trying it only confirmed my expectations...
I emailed AQ and Transparent. No response from AQ. Transparent, to their credit, got back to me with the capacitance specs on some different models including the phono specific ones. All close to 200pf/m. But good customer support from them and I have enjoyed their entry level stuff over the years. Haven't bought cables in a long time but had a need and wanted to try all Mogami front to back.
Cool for Transparent. Bizarre and cowardly from AQ at the very least. i have some Mogami cables coming in from Performance Audio. How’s their work?
Audioquest publishes capacitance for their tonearm and turntable cables, or at least they specify it at less than 90pF/1.5M...
They are good. Pretty quick delivery time considering they make them to order. Overall, they were a little less money than WBC/Amazon for the same cables too. Don't believe the per foot price on the main "custom cables" page. Once you put them together you'll see the real price. They also promptly replied to an email question on how they were going to wire/terminate the 2549's. (Directional or not?). The speaker cables with the Techflex jackets are pretty slick looking. Plus I ordered some extra bulk 3103 to make jumpers with.
I guess the issue was me finding Sidewinder and Copperhead. I googled the cr&p out of it too. I did see from some forums the AQ cables are low capacitance. I wouldn't buy Golden Gate or other Bridges and Falls series though. I don't dig the "single cable" design.
Dude , come on. Let’s not get into a debate on what they publish. for the price and their jabber on technology etc , they publish zero specs. thanks
Not debating anyone, it seemed like @Boltman92124 was asking them for the capacitance spec, so I posted it.
Audioquests marketing is about as legit as Sex Panthers cologne by Odeon “60% of the time, it works every time “
Well I bought the 2964 and used it between my TT and preamp. I run an ART9XI so it’s a LOMC. tried this on the facts @Oelewapper brought up here. I also recorded a few selections to my PC using 2497 and then 2964, to do live a/b syncing and look for any apparent differences. And there were improvements with the 2964. slight, but definite! Higher end a bit more energy, hard to explain. Less laid back and smushed sounding like the 2497. It’s not a total “veil being lifted” but the tonality was different; and this is before the cable is burned in! So yes, I too recommend 2964 for turntable interconnects. Cheaper than 2497 too!
You really need to try the LC-1 then. I have the 2964 and the LC-1 is better. the Belden 1694A BJ supplies for RCA is also very good. A touch different than the LC-1. It’s a bit tighter sounding than the LC-1. The LC-1 is a touch more lush sounding. Really the best RCA cable I’ve tried and I’ve tried a few. And yes these cables really shouldn’t make a diff especially at these lengths.
That’s what I experienced - as long as it’s a good cable it doesn’t matter, but phono cables are an exception. Especially with MM cartridges, but also with LOMC to a smaller degree.
