xtz3.jpg

Hírek, akciók, újdonságok

  • Híreink
  • Legújabb termékek
  • Népszerű cikkek
  • Aktuális akciók
  • Népszerű termékek

  • 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
prev
next

Új Logitech távirányítók

News image

A Logitech két új távirányítót jelentett be: Harmony Remote 600 és 650. A sajtóhír részletesen itt ...

2010 március 5.

Bővebben...

SUMOH Tinyamp S30 teszt a Hificityn!

News image

  A Hificity.hu-n megjelent egy készülék teszt a SUMOH Tinyamp S30 erősítőnkről, Kányási István(Hifipisti) tollából.  Itt ol...

2010 február 26.

Bővebben...

Megjelent a Squeezebox Server 7.4.2.

News image

Az új csomag kisebb hibajavításokat tartalmaz, komolyabb újdonságok a jelenleg béta verziójú 7.5-ben lesznek. 7.4.2 Release Highlights This release fixes Squeezebox Radio bugs found by 7.4.1 users. It is required when operating the Radio with the optional battery. Squeezebox Server Improved alarm reliability.Various scanner-related tag reading fixes.Fixed audio glitches at the end of WAV/AIFF files.Fixed gapless playback when playing PCM on Squeezebox 1. Radio Improved alarm ...

2010 február 24.

Bővebben...

Pioneer Prémium Blu-Ray lejátszók

News image

A Pioneer prémium kategóriás Blu-Ray lejászói mostantól a ...

2010 február 11.

Bővebben...

Twitteren a Bartimex Audio

Híreink, újdonságaink ezentúl rövidített formában a Twitteren is megjelennek. Link: Twitter - ...

2010 február 10.

Bővebben...

Beyerdynamic fejhallgatók

News image

A Basys viszonteladójaként elkezdtük a német Beyerdynamic cég fejhallgatóinak ...

2010 február 1.

Bővebben...

Új Popcorn lejátszó érkezik

News image

A-200 néven érkezik január végén Popcorn legújabb médialejátszója. Képességei és ára alapján egyértelműen az A-110 utódjának tekinthető, annak minden jó tulajdonságát örökölte, de már több memóriát és napjaink egyik legerősebb és legújabb médiaprocesszorát (SigmaDesigns SMP8643) használja. Szoftver oldalról a C-200 és az A-200 várhatóan egyforma lesz, mind a felhasználói felület, mind a funkciók te...

2010 január 23.

Bővebben...

Reckhorn A-1000: új nagytelesítményű sub erősítő

News image

A Reckhorn a nagysikerű A-403 sub erősítő mellett piacra dobta az A-1000-es típust, amely valamivel kedvezőbb áron kínál több mint kétszeres teljesítmény. Az erősítő meghallgatható a ...

2010 január 21.

Bővebben...

Karácsonyi Akció 2009!

Karácsonyi akciónkban az alábbi termékeket adjuk jelentős kedvezménnyel: - Logitech Transporter hálózati audió lejátszó  379.900 Ft helyett 349.000 Ft - Logitech Harmony 900 univerzális távirányító 99.900 Ft helyett 79.900 Ft - Pioneer PDX-Z9 SACD receiver hálózati audió lejátszó + Pioneer Pure Malt hangfal pár 284.900 Ft - WLM Sonata csöves erősítő 899.000 Ft helyett 799.000 Ft - Audioquest Gibraltar 2x3 m Gibraltar hangsugárzó kábelszett  225.420 Ft helyett 175.000 Ft - Minden ...

2009 december 7.

Bővebben...

XTZ Divine - új felső kategóriás hangfal

News image

Az XTZ Malmöben bemutatta az új, még készülő felső kategóriás hangfalát, a Divine-t. Az új hangfal előreláthatólag jövő tavasztól lesz re...

2009 november 30.

Bővebben...
More in: Latest
99 000 Ft


1 199 000 Ft


199 900 Ft
189 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 10 000 Ft


649 900 Ft
599 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 50 000 Ft


  • 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
prev
next

Havi Akció

Minden hónapban más-más gyártó termékeiből adunk jelentős kedvezményeket. Márciusi akciónkban az alábbi termékeket adjuk  kedvezménnyel: - XTZ CD-100-as Cd lejátszó 114.000 Ft helyett 99.900 Ft-ért! - C.E.C. CD-3800-as Cd lejátszó 254.150 Ft helyett 234.900 ...

2009-december-7

Read more

Logitech iPod hangszórók és dokkolók

News image

Jelentős árkedvezménnyel kínálunk  Logitech iPod hangszórókat és dokkolókat a készlet erejéig. Az akciós termékek a következők:    mm32 Portable Speakers for iPod : 4.000 Ft   Pure-Fi Express iPod Speaker : 11.000 Ft     Pure-Fi Anywhere: 19.000 Ft     Pure-Fi Mobile: 23.000 Ft     Wireless Music System for Ipod with 3.5mm jack: 9.000 Ft     Pure-Fi Elite iPod Speaker: 35.000 Ft   A készülékek webshopban nem szerepelnek, érdeklődés esetén telefonáljon, vagy ...

2009-november-10

Read more

Kupon akció

Iratkozzon fel hírlevelünkre és megajándékozzuk egy 4%-os diszkontra feljogosító elektronikus kuponra, melyet webáruházunkban használhat ...

2008-november-24

Read more

C.E.C. márka bevezetési akció

Minden C.E.C. termék 15% diszkonttal kapható február 1-től. Visszavonásig ...

2008-január-31

Read more

Webáruházunk kínálatából:
24 400 Ft


69 900 Ft


47 000 Ft


74 840 Ft


649 900 Ft
559 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 90 000 Ft


489 000 Ft


28 000 Ft


599 900 Ft


69 900 Ft
67 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 2 000 Ft


0 Ft
229 000 Ft
187 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 41 100 Ft


129 900 Ft
124 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 5 000 Ft


190 000 Ft


164 450 Ft


1 899 000 Ft


550 000 Ft
467 500 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


47 990 Ft


31 000 Ft


5 700 Ft


2 999 000 Ft


856 900 Ft
799 000 Ft
Kedvezmény: 57 900 Ft


149 670 Ft


94 900 Ft


99 000 Ft


279 000 Ft


5 450 Ft


26 840 Ft


49 990 Ft
46 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 3 090 Ft


249 900 Ft
229 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 20 000 Ft


169 000 Ft


13 500 Ft


99 900 Ft


739 900 Ft
659 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 80 000 Ft


739 000 Ft
628 150 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


59 000 Ft


84 990 Ft
79 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 5 090 Ft


125 000 Ft


31 720 Ft


1 199 000 Ft


269 900 Ft
249 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 20 000 Ft


1 350 Ft


379 000 Ft


169 000 Ft


245 460 Ft


679 000 Ft


52 000 Ft


64 500 Ft


65 000 Ft


669 000 Ft


299 000 Ft
254 150 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


67 720 Ft


36 500 Ft


134 000 Ft


218 000 Ft


299 000 Ft
254 150 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


499 000 Ft


249 900 Ft
219 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 30 000 Ft


0 Ft
0 Ft
299 000 Ft


137 900 Ft


299 000 Ft
254 150 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


84 900 Ft


199 900 Ft
189 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 10 000 Ft


139 900 Ft
125 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 14 000 Ft


99 900 Ft


199 000 Ft


280 640 Ft


39 860 Ft


460 000 Ft


101 000 Ft


55 990 Ft
51 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 4 090 Ft


79 900 Ft
74 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 5 000 Ft


133 200 Ft


88 950 Ft


1 069 000 Ft


0 Ft
114 000 Ft


31 000 Ft


351 000 Ft


21 960 Ft


164 450 Ft


99 000 Ft
95 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 3 100 Ft


89 875 Ft


13 000 Ft


899 000 Ft


249 900 Ft
219 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 30 000 Ft


139 900 Ft
125 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 14 000 Ft


78 000 Ft


118 750 Ft


499 000 Ft


9 600 Ft


31 720 Ft


15 000 Ft


745 000 Ft


840 000 Ft


139 000 Ft


1 199 000 Ft


450 000 Ft
349 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 100 100 Ft


79 900 Ft


569 900 Ft
499 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 70 000 Ft


949 000 Ft


35 790 Ft


182 620 Ft


118 600 Ft


799 000 Ft


59 900 Ft


299 900 Ft
279 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 20 000 Ft


33 900 Ft


295 000 Ft


116 730 Ft


2 199 000 Ft


225 420 Ft


60 060 Ft


419 000 Ft
356 150 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


649 900 Ft
599 900 Ft
Kedvezmény: 50 000 Ft


29 000 Ft


53 750 Ft


210 280 Ft


269 000 Ft
228 650 Ft
Kedvezmény: 15.00%


89 070 Ft


69 900 Ft


13 000 Ft


 

Audio Hírcsatornák

  • HFP
  • EnjoyTheMusic
  • Computeraudiophil
  • Stereophile
  • Sonicflare
  • Audio Junkies
  • AvGuide
  • Dagogo
  • Audiophilia
  • Spintricity
  • Hometheatrehifi
Home
A Hi-Fi Piac Magazin online kiadása
  • Bladelius Embla Basic
    embla01A Bladelius Design Group cég tulajdonos fő tervezője, Mike Bladelius pályafutása során olyan cégeknek tervezett többek között készülékeket, mint a Treshold és a DLS, úgyhogy alaposan kiismerte már az audio világ titkait. Cégének legújabb készülékei az Embla Basic és az Embla Full, melyek a CD lemezek lejátszására is képesek, de a fő funkciójuk nem ez, hiszen valójában beépített szilárd memóriás szerverek.
  • DENON CARA
    caraA DENON legfrisebb házimozi fejlesztése a CARA, mely elegánsan egyesít egy audiofil osztályú 5.1-es surround receiver-t és egy fejlett Blu-ray lejátszót közös házban. A nemzetközi CES Fejlesztés 2010 Design és tervezési díjjal jutalmazta e terméket.
    A készülékház ívelt vonalakkal és felszínnel határolt, esztétikailag is különleges darab. Az 5.1 csatornás surround rádióerősítő 2-forrás fogadására alkalmas, és 2-zónás elosztási lehetőséget biztosít. Beépített Blu-ray lejátszója a legmodernebb vonalat képviseli,  BD Live csatlakozási lehetőséggel is ellátták.
  • Esoteric RZ-1
    rz1_1Az Esoteric márciusban megjelenő RZ-1-es készüléke egy igazi szórakoztatóközpont lesz, ugyanis 4 az 1-ben rendszerben CD/SACD játszót, erősítőt, USB bemenetet és DA konvertert illetve phono fokozatot tartalmaz. Felszereltségének köszönhetően széleskörűen konfigurálható, így analóg és különféle digitális forrásokról szinte mindenféle audio jel lejátszható vele. Az alacsony, divatos formájú alumínium házban az Esoterictől megszokott módon különösen értékes és kifinomult áramkörök és alkatelemek találhatók.
  • Új sport fülhallgatókat mutatott be a Sennheiser és az Adidas
    mx680Csúcsminőségű hangzás, kiváló viselési kényelem és ellenálló-képesség a külső hatásokkal, mint például vízzel, verejtékkel és hideggel szemben: ezek a fő jellemzői a Sennheiser és az adidas új sport fülhallgató sorozatának. A két nagyhírű cég új együttműködését összesen négy masszív kialakítású, a környzeti hatásoknak stabilan ellenálló fülhallgató modellel kezdi, amelyeket kimondottan sportolás közbeni használatra terveztek. A modellek különösen kényelmes és ergonómikus kilakítása garantálja, hogy a fülhallgatókat használók minden figyelmüket a teljesítményre fordíthassák.
  • Isotek Syncro
    Isotek_syncroA tápszűrő specialista Isotek legújabb Syncro típusa nem pusztán egy újabb tápkábel, hanem a nevéhez hűen egy valódi hálózati táp feljavító, szinkronizáló eszköz. A vadonatúj fejlesztésű áramkör a kábelen elhelyezett rezonanciamentes anodizált alumínium dobozkában lakozik, és a tápáram szinusz hullámának szabályos szimmetrikus alakját állítja vissza, így optimalizálva a kábellel csatlakoztatott készülékek teljesítményét. Az egység ezen felül a DC szennyeződéseket is eltávolítja, megszünteti a mikrofonikus zajokat és a transzformátor mechanikai zajait és vibrációit.
Enjoy The Music.com
Audiophile high-end audio industry news plus Hi-Fi equipment.
Enjoy The Music.com
Computer Audiophile
To fill a large gap in the audiophile community. Instead of waiting for traditional sources to cover audiophile grade computer systems in greater detail, we started computeraudiophile.com.
  • Computer Audiophile Suggested Hardware List

    The Computer Audiophile Suggested Hardware list has been overhauled. Version 2.0 of the C.A.S.H. List contains expanded hardware and software recommendations geared even more toward the computer audiophile. There is no specific checklist or criteria a product must meet to be on the C.A.S.H. List. Great specs don't equal great sound or performance. However, it's clearly in everyone's best interest that these products are 100% worthy of recommendation. Like all articles here on Computer Audiophile the comments section is wide open to every reader in the world to leave an opinion. The list is continuously updated with additions and deletions to make it a great resource for CA readers to research products. The C.A.S.H. List a single data point from one of many sources of information about these and many more products.

    read more

  • Windows 7 Audio & J River Media Center 14 Configuration

    Computer audiophiles using Windows 7 based music servers have a plethora of configuration and application choices for music management and playback. A quick look at Wikipedia's list of applications, Windows, OS X and otherwise, can overwhelm anyone. Over the years I've tried more operating systems and applications than I can remember. Many of these have show stopping flaws that rule them out as contenders immediately. Applications that can't play certain file formats or all required sample rates don't receive much attention from me. That was the case over one year ago with J river Media Center 13. I tried to play some of the Reference Recordings HRx 24/176.4 material and had nothing but problems. No doubt the problems could have been worked out, but with so many options available elsewhere I didn't see any reason to spend time with the application. Since this initial underwhelming experience J River has released Media Center version 14. In addition many colleagues in the industry have encouraged me to give it another serious look. One colleague even backed up his suggestion with measurements showing JRMC's playback bit transparency. I started to see the light at CES this year and realized it was finally time take another look at J River Media Center as well as time to get serious about Windows 7.

    read more

  • What Is HD?

    What is HD? What is high resolution? In the video world most people will say 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. They don't consider compression or the original format of a video. When it comes to music the term HD is tossed around very loosely and can include anything that's not MP3. The definition of HD is incredibly elusive. Do the letters even stand for something? One can say HD stands for High definition. However when the letters HD are used on a binocular lens coating, an automotive paint additive, and a wall-mount clay extruder all bets are off. The diluere of the letters HD continues. I'm willing to bet we'll see some 3D audio downloads if the past is any predictor of the future. AIX and iTrax President Mark Waldrep has a very clear idea of what constitutes HD and high resolution audio & video. In the following linked podcast Mark even mentions Sonic Studio's Amarra and the large role music servers will play in the future of high end audio.

    read more

  • Computer Audiophile Pocket Server - C.A.P.S.

    Over the last several months I've researched different combinations of motherboards, computer cases, audio cards, and accessories that go along with these components. The goal of all this research was to put together a hardware and software music server solution that I would actually use and the Computer Audiophile readers could actually use. I would do the leg work, test & listen to everything, and provide the information for CA readers to put together the exact same music server. This sounds somewhat simple until one considers all the requirements that go into such an audiophile solution. Great sound, great looking, no moving parts, silent, fairly inexpensive, and 100% of the components must be available today. Along the way this server was named the Pocket Server by a colleague who was very surprise at its small size when I pulled it out of my carry-on luggage. The server is a bit larger today than it was at that time but the name hasn't changed. What follows is the story of the Computer Audiophile Pocket Server and all the information required to recreate the $1,500 C.A.P.S solution.

    read more

  • Peachtree Audio Nova Review Part II

    A little over one week ago the Peachtree Audio Nova review was published here on Computer Audiophile. Since that time many CA readers read the review and left honest comments. I've also read and re-read the review and spent quite a while reading every single comment several times. I was initially surprised by the criticism. After a few days I came to the realization that the CA readers were right. The review was in fact rushed and didn't contain much information to make it useful. It clearly did not live up to the CA trademark All The Bits Fit To Print™. Thus, I'm taking full responsibility for a half-assed review and making it up to all the supportive CA readers. Over the last five days I've dedicated time to using the Nova in almost every configuration imaginable. What follows are my impressions from "The Nova Sessions."

    read more

Stereophile RSS Feed
Audiophile News & Reviews
Stereophile RSS Feed
  • Hafler XL-280 power amplifier
    These days, most audio perfectionists see Hafler products as ranking about halfway between the mainstream mid-fi of Sansui and Akai and the cutting-edge leadership of, for example, Krell and Threshold. It is not that Hafler products are perceived as being mediocre; just that they are not considered to be among the products one would choose were cost no object.
  • Recording of March 1990: Live in the Whispering Gallery
    Ah, the Persuasions...! These guys and their acappella Brooklyn street-corner doo-wop can make me feel good faster than any group I know. After listening to this strong, loving recording, I listened to all their other records one after another. Best kind of rave I know.
  • Copycode: Diminishing DAT
    How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips move. How can you tell when a recording system is perfect? CBS tries to outlaw it.
  • Copycode & the Future of DAT
    Now that Sony has bought CBS's records division, and the infamous Copycode bill seems to be dying in Congress, the way may be clearing at last for the US introduction of the new Digital Audio Tape system. This has sparked renewed speculation in the industry about the impact DAT will have on existing formats, particularly the fledgling CD. Some are convinced DAT will kill CD, because of its ability to record as well as play digital recordings. Others believe DAT won't even gain a foothold in the market, for the same reason quadraphonic sound laid an egg back in the '70s: The public can't handle more than one "standard" format. I feel that both views are wrong, and that—as is usually the case with extreme views—the truth lies in between. I believe DAT will catch on in the marketplace, but never in a big way, and certainly not the way CD has. Here's why.
  • Axpona Approaches
    Axpona, the Audio Expo of North America, is geared up for its premiere next Friday in Jacksonville, Florida. The new Show runs March 5–7 at the 350-room Wyndham Riverwalk Hotel, which overlooks the St. Johns River and is just 15 minutes from the Atlantic Ocean. Sponsored by Stereophile, which will blog live from the show, Axpona is already looking like a winner. Impressive figures for advance Internet registration (discounted through March 1) indicate that Axpona might meet or even surpass attendance at last year's Rocky Mountain Audio Fest, in Denver.
Audio Junkies
Audio news and product reviews
  • Second Skin Speaker Tweaker Pads


    Second Skin, the sound deadening company has re-released their Speaker Tweaker Pads. The Speaker Tweakers are designed to sit three to eight inches behind your OEM or aftermarket door speakers and absorb and diffuse the reflections from the rear wave of the speaker. Without the interference of reflections from inside the door panel, distortion is reduced and response is improved.

    Continue reading Second Skin Speaker Tweaker Pads
  • New Pioneer Receivers Get 3D


    Pioneer has released their new 2010 receiver lineup, and the big new feature is HDMI 1.4 and 3D pass-through support for all models. The new lineup consists of the VSX-520-K ($229), the VSX-820-K ($299), the VSX-920-K ($399), the VSX-1020-K ($549), and the range topper VSX-1120-K ($749), in addition to HDMI 1.4, all models also support Bluetooth and Dolby ProLogic IIz.

    Continue reading New Pioneer Receivers Get 3D
  • Advertise Your Favorite Artists on Your Headphones


    Industrial designer Brian Garret Schuur has created some rather unusual headphones. They feature a sculpted headband custom made to order with the names of your favorite artists and some weird (and probably uncomfortable) earpads, and are simply known as the "Street Headphones".

    Continue reading Advertise Your Favorite Artists on Your Headphones
  • Monster Butterfly Phones by Vivienne Tam


    If you're not excited about the prospect of having Dr. Dre or Lady Gaga in your ears, don't fret! Monster Cable still wants your money! Monster's latest famous person influenced headphones leave the world of music for the world of fashion, and feature a design that echoes uber fashion designer Vivienne Tam's "Butterfly Lovers" collection. Says Ms. Tam: "Fashion and music together give you a different journey, different world and experiences of life. Music gives my designs movement and rhythm. I dance with my designs. Double Happiness."

    Continue reading Monster Butterfly Phones by Vivienne Tam
  • Cambridge Audio 550A Integrated Amp and 550C CD Player Review


    If you're in the market for a high quality integrated amp and CD player for under $600 each, take a look at the Azur 550A integrated amp and 550C CD player from value kings Cambridge Audio. The 550A uses a high quality Alps volume pot, oversized toroidal transformer, high-current Sanken output transistors, and produces 60 watts per channel. The 550C features a Wolfson WM8740 24-bit/192kHz DAC. Here's a quote from the recently posted Absolute Sound review:

    Continue reading Cambridge Audio 550A Integrated Amp and 550C CD Player Review
News
  • HDtracks Expands Catalog with New Hi-Res Indie Rock Offerings
    Channels: 
    The Absolute Sound
    Hifi+
    CyberListener
    Source: 
    AVGuide
    Industry News: 
    This is Industry News

    HDtracks, an audiophile-oriented music download service that specializes in sales of high resolution (that is, CD-quality or better) music files, announced earlier this week that it is expanding its catalog of indie rock offerings through a new deal with Beggars Group. Beggars Group, in turn, is comprised of the following premier indie rock labels: 4AD, Matador, Rough Trade, and XL recordings.

    Top pick: 
    not
    GEC only: 
    not
    Free Stuff Article: 
    not
  • Sony Announces 3D Compatible A/V Receiver
    Channels: 
    Pixels
    The Perfect Vision
    Source: 
    AVGuide
    Industry News: 
    not

     

    Top pick: 
    not
    GEC only: 
    not
    Free Stuff Article: 
    not
  • Monster Announces Stylish, Vivienne Tam-Influenced “Butterfly” In-Ear Headphones
    Channels: 
    CyberListener
    Source: 
    AVGuide
    Industry News: 
    This is Industry News

     

    Top pick: 
    not
    GEC only: 
    not
    Free Stuff Article: 
    not
  • Oppo Announces Inexpensive, Full-Function BDP-80 Universal/Blu-ray Player
    Channels: 
    Pixels
    The Perfect Vision
    Source: 
    AVGuide
    Industry News: 
    This is Industry News

    At the time of its release in Fall of 2009, Oppo Digital’s award-winning BDP-83 ($499) was, hands down, the world’s most affordable, full-featured universal/Blu-ray player. Now, however, an astonishingly inexpensive new Oppo player—the BDP-80 ($289)—has arrived on the scene to claim that title.

    Top pick: 
    not
    GEC only: 
    not
    Free Stuff Article: 
    not
  • Full-Featured InFocus SP8602 1080p DLP Projector Now Shipping
    Channels: 
    Pixels
    The Perfect Vision
    Source: 
    AVGuide
    Industry News: 
    This is Industry News

    The Perfect Vision news desk recently received word that InFocus’ new full-featured, 1080p DLP projector, the SP8602 has begun shipping. We present the full text of the InFocus press announcement, below.

    __________

    Top pick: 
    not
    GEC only: 
    not
    Free Stuff Article: 
    not
Audiophilia
The Online Journal for the Serious Audiophile
  • Perreaux Launches New Compact Disc Transport
    I was a huge fan of Peter Perreaux’s SM2 Stereo Preamplifier and PMF2150B Stereo Power Amplifier in the mid 80s. Knockout stuff from New Zealand. Nice to see Perreaux is still around and flourishing. As such, I thought I’d pass on their design team’s latest offering. DUNEDIN, New Zealand (March 4th, 2010) – New Zealand hi fi [...]
  • q-JAYS Dual Micro Armatures Sound Isolating Earphones
    by Anthony Kershaw I received a very pleasant email from Urban Kindult, rep for Sweden’s JAYS, promoting its line of higher end earphones (manufacturing since 2006). The noise canceling, dual armature, small beauties sounded intriguing, so I requested a pair of the top end q-JAYS for review. A week later they arrived safe and sound from [...]
  • The Oppo BDP-83 SE
    by Roy Harris During 2009, ESS Technology introduced a 32 bit Sabre DAC chip. I am also aware of a Wolfson 32 bit DAC chip, too. During 2009, I reviewed a DAC furnished by ESS Technology. The Oppo is the first one-box player utilizing  the ESS Sabre chip. The following are the salient differences between the Oppo and [...]
  • Mozart – Symphonies 38-41/SCO/Mackerras/Linn
    by Andy Fawcett Linn CKD 308 (2 hybrid multi-channel SACDs) Play times: Disc 1 - 66:49   Disc 2 - 72:29 In retrospect, it’s easy to see how the stars aligned for this release; the Scottish Chamber Orchestra, fresh from a string of acclaimed recordings for Linn, tackling these cornerstones of the classical oeuvre under the baton of [...]
  • Joey Roth — The Ceramic Speakers
    by Anthony Kershaw This is an internet/social media influenced review from beginning to end. I discovered these Joey Roth design beauties via a flurry of ‘tweets’ on Twitter. News travels very fast at 140 characters. When I saw the pictures, I knew I had to hear them, hold them, touch them. Roth is a San Francisco-based designer. [...]
Spintricity
This is the magazine about audiophiles, high-end home audio, and the adventures and misadventures of the people involved in the pursuit of the Ultimate Music Experience using ordinary household hi-fi stereos.
  • Got Music?
    "Innovation Versus Apathy" Or maybe that should be Innovation AND Apathy.

    It has been over a year since we started Spintricity. It has been 6 months since we started our free advertising campaign.

    Learned something about this industry - especially how it contrasts to others in terms of the interest manufacturers have in marketing themselves and their industry. The bottom line is that our industry\'s apathy with respect to marketing is responsible for 50%? 75%? of the decline in our hobby (we usually blame the rise of home theater and the refusal of our industry to provide products for that market segment).

    I guess we should have known. We get a lot of people wanting to put ads on our Audio Federation Blog - but I do not remember any of them being part of the high end audio community.

    Innovation. It, (and we are using a liberal definition of the term), exists solely in making this years product better than last years. This is great thing - don\'t get me wrong. But it does mean that we get what we have now - better and better products with fewer and fewer people interested in using them.

    -Mike
  • 2010 CES Recession Busting Speakers
    "2010 CES Recession Busting Speakers" As I looked through my notes and photos from the recent 2010 CES, one thing that struck me was a couple of really great values in speakers. Regardless of technology, size, or price, these speakers impressed me with their ability to convey music beyond accepted expectations. I kept coming back to them as offering extraordinary value and sound for the dollar.

    Economy got you down, a little worried, or confused? Want some new speakers but don’t want to extend yourself unreasonably? Want a great value that you can be proud of? Have I got some suggestions for you to contemplate! Consider the following: "by Brian Boehler" "Sonist - Recital 3" How about a nice slim floor standing loudspeaker that offers a 6” woofer, ribbon tweeter in an integral waveguide in a solid poplar front baffle, tapered sidewalls, 93dB sensitivity, 8 ohms (6 ohms minimum), with frequency response from 45Hz to 40kHz, as well as Goertz Alpha Core copper foil Inductors, Audience Auricaps, Black Hole 5 cabinet damping, Cardas Tri Eutectic lead-free solder, Audience Auric hookup wire, Cardas gold-plated solid copper binding posts, Cardas jumpers, bi-wireable and bi-ampable, and adjustable floor spikes? Add to this a real wood cabinet (baffle and sides), two coats of semi-gloss lacquer, and 5 year parts and labor warranty with a retail price of $2,195 a pair!

    The speaker is 40” high x 8.25” W x 12” D and weighs 50 pounds. This speaker can be driven by a small tube amplifier with as little as 5 watts per channel. Oh, by the way, the speaker sounded great. It has real world limitations in the lower bass and can’t blow the doors off their hinges but for real world sound quality and a great look, it is an exceptional value. This speaker is a recession buster by offering more of what an audiophile wants at prices you would expect to pay for cheap vinyl wrapped mass produced junk!

    Need to get under $2,000 for a pair? How about the same speaker with Medite cabinet walls with a black textured finish but still keeping the solid poplar front baffle finished in light cherry, medium cherry, or dark cherry and a retail price of $1,795 a pair. Check out the Sonist website or give Randy Bankert a call. You sill meet a very nice sincere person that wants to share his passion with you. "Magnepan 1.7" Overall, the sound of the Magnepan 1.7 was the most exciting that I heard in Las Vegas in light of the sound per dollars spent. A combination of price, sound quality, and tasteful selection of music equated to a real surprise and treat. I actually left the room thinking that it was one of the best values in sound I’ve ever heard. Magnepan has been around for a long time but this experience was revelatory in my opinion.

    The Magnepan 1.6, this models predecessor, hadn’t changed in over 12 years. But now we have some updated drivers, updated crossover, and new more modern styling. The 1.6 used a flat planar magnetic driver for the lower frequencies and an aluminum ribbon tweeter. The new 1.7 is a three way with all drivers now based on quasi-ribbon technology. In simple terms, we now have a full range ribbon speaker that is more coherent and of one voice than many “expensive” speakers.

    Instead of the traditional wrapped wood frame the new 1.7 is only 2” thick and has an aluminum wrap-around edge molding making it look more modern and less imposing. The only downside is that they are large flat panel speakers and they can dominate most rooms they are put into. The Wife Approval Factor (WAF) might be very low unless your spouse cottons to the sound over the visually dominating presence factor. If you have crossed this hurdle in the past or it isn’t an issue going forward, you owe it to yourself to give these speakers a careful listen. I can’t think of another speaker for about $2,000 that can give you such a large glimpse of the ultra high-end. This speaker will raise the bar for what should be expected by other manufacturers.

    I’m also very curious to see what they will do with the 3.6 and 20.1. If both of these models forgo the planar magnetic drivers and go to the quasi-ribbon architecture, we could really be in for a treat. "Tyler Acoustics Decade D10" Have a little more disposable income than average and want a large good looking speaker that can fill a big room with sound? How about the Tyler Acoustics Decade D10’s? They boast a frequency response from 25 to 20k, an impedance of 8 ohms, a sensitivity rating of 91db. These beauties are 16” W x 20” D x 74” H, and weigh in at 230 pounds each.

    The drivers in the D10 are totally custom built to Tyler’s specifications and to the highest standards. The woofers and mid ranges have paper cones, aluminum phase plugs, one piece magnesium frames, copper pole pieces and voice coil leads for the best sound quality. The tweeters are a 1" soft dome using a high quality motor structure with an aluminum faceplate. The crossovers are custom designed and voiced by Danny Ritchie of GR Research. High quality parts are used throughout the crossover design. The Decade line comes with magnetic grills and your choice of either single or bi-wire posts. Tyler also offers over 80 different finishes to choose from. Standard finishes include cherry, oak, black oak, maple, walnut and ribbon mahogany. Other finishes are priced accordingly.

    Oh yes, the price, how about $13,500 for the pair? When you consider the size, weight, driver complement, finish, and look, I say bravo! Factor in their trade-up program and 20 day money back guarantee and you have a winner. I can hear you thinking another question! How much is it going to cost me to ship such a large and heavy speaker across the county? I bet that can add $1,000 dollars or more to the cost of the speaker. Wrong!! Shipping is included in the $13,500 price tag. All considered, an amazing deal and extremely high customer satisfaction when you consider the already extraordinary value. Although expensive in pure dollar terms, it is a tremendous value compared to other brand name speakers of equal merit.

    Ty Lashbrook is the owner and visionary of Tyler Acoustics. Since he deals in factory direct pricing, you have the opportunity to deal with a gentleman in our industry. Give him a call and experience real honest helpful service without the hype and high pressure sales tactics. He really does want you to be happy and satisfied with his product. Different strokes for different folks. I have offered three different types of speakers for your consideration and all offer recession busting value in my opinion. As always, your mileage may vary. You might have your own list of great value speakers that might be equally valid. Reflecting back over the show in general, I saw one trend to offer more value for the money and another trend to offer more prestige and status. Take the opportunity to seek out these speakers at a show like the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest (RMAF) or other appropriate venue and see if you don’t leave thinking that these speakers offer tremendous value in the world of high-end audio.

    Brian Boehler "Conclusion"
  • The WHO at the Super Bowl 2010
    "The WHO: Live at the 2010 Super Bowl" Certainly the best half time show in my lifetime. The sound was good to excellent for TV. They had a direct feed of Pete Townshend's guitar on the right channel - a little disconnected from the rest - but it was very clear.
    I only caught the last song or so with the camera - just didn't think of taking photos of the stupid TV until the end. Also didn't think of running the signal direct and not through TiVo - ergo the wavy lines in the pictures. But the photos do show what a great show they put on. Wow.
  • MIT Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable

    Equipment Review: Musical Interface Technology (MIT) Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable

    The dreaded cable review! I believe one of the hardest and most challenging audio equipment reviews is for cables/cable sets. Why, you ask? It is no secret that reviewers do not flock in droves for the chance to review cables. Cables represent the interaction of three inter-related electrical parameters that have to be evaluated within the context of a particular system. These electrical parameters include inductance, capacitance, and resistance. These three interact/interplay within a system and are very hard to quantify for the general public. I can tell you what I hear in my system but that may not translate to anything meaningful for your system. Hence the problem of reviewing cables, we each hear differently and have systems and environments that make it hard to compare sound quality.

    My impressions are valid within the context of my system which may not be true for yours. The interplay of the above parameters between components in your system will vary. What is not clear is by how much and whether those differences negate my general listing impressions of the sound as it would apply to your system. This is why reviewers generally play it safe with broad sweeping generalizations about the superiority of one brand over another.

    There have been a flurry of audiophiles on the internet who are very vocal about their views which include discussions that the hype around today’s audiophile cables is all voodoo, snake oil, or simply put, a bunch of BS. If this view is held due to the marketing literature and hype surrounding “new technologies”, I can understand the general frustration. While sonic differences can be small, they can also be the difference between contrived and real perceived sound in my opinion. Most reviewers want people to respect our perceptions, hearing, and understanding of all things audio. If I declare something as wonderful, revelatory, or hands above the rest, I want others to draw to that conclusion and generally agree with me. Cables can put you in a position where others wonder if you have some wax build up in your ear canal. Go figure!

    MIT History

    Bruce Brisson began designing audio cables in the 1970’s after “hearing” the sonic problems inherent in typical audio cables of the day. In 1981, he licensed the first of many of his designs and patents to Monster Cable. I don’t know about you, but this statement leaves me rather cold and indifferent to his beginnings and early accomplishments. Monster Cable, Noel Lee, and who really cares? In 1984, he founded Music Interface Technologies (MIT) and still heads the company as we know it today. If you have been around audio for long, you will recognize that Bruce has had a strong influence on the industry and has brought forward many concepts and design criteria. In 1989, he created the low-pass filter network concept, designing the patented CVT® and Terminator™ technologies that are contained in the distinctive modules for which all MIT products are known. Many key designers of high end equipment have either directly recommended MIT products or worked with MIT to design their own product recommendations based on MIT modified products.

    Electrical Parameters in Cables

    In order to understand why cables can sound so different and why everyone has a favorite flavor, you need to have a basic knowledge of what makes up a wire. I’m not talking about the actual wire or weave or dielectric but rather the electrical parameters as a result of the design choices. Here is an extremely simplified description of electrical parameters of cables.

    Inductance: Inductance in a speaker cable is largely determined by the area between the conductors. Many speaker cables have conductors that run side by side ("twin-lead"). These conductors are separated by a small distance, so have moderate inductance. Some cables use many small wires that are woven together. This reduces inductance greatly, but at the cost of increased capacitance.

    Capacitance: Capacitance is a function of how close the conductors are to each other. So, to keep the capacitance low, the conductors must be widely separated. Note: this is just the opposite of what we need for low inductance. Woven wires are close together so they have high capacitance.

    Resistance: Resistance is the tendency for the wire in a cable to oppose the flow of current. Most cables are designed to have low resistance so that they don\'t significantly reduce the damping factor of the amplifier.

    The interaction of these three parameters can have a profound influence on what you ultimately hear as music in your room. There is no one right formula for designing these parameters. Depending on your equipment choices such as tubes versus solid state, electrostatic speakers, or passive pre-amps, these all have strong requirements that you should not ignore. Understanding how these electrical parameters all work together within the context of your system can save you a lot of money, wasted time, and general frustration.

    Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable

    The Magnum M1.3 speaker cable has 50 poles or articulation. The cable includes enhancements over its predecessor with an upgrade to MIT’s two proprietary 2C3D technologies: Stable Image Technology (SIT) and Jitter Free Analog (JFA). Ok, that sounds like a bunch of marketing gibberish, so what is 2C3D technology? As the name suggests, 2C3D was engineered to create a believable three dimensional soundstage from a two-channel system. The 2C3D technology offers the optimal balance between detail, imaging, and soundstage (the real question is who defined optimal?). 2C3D makes it easy to identify each of the individual instruments/voices within a well defined soundstage, at any volume level or so the story goes.

    And by the way, what are 50 poles of articulation? This relates to MIT’s Multipole networks. The website states “these networks are wired in parallel, passively correcting the problems that are inherent with ordinary cable designs. All cables have one ideal area where the capacitance, inductance and resistance are balanced for proper articulation. This describes a single-pole of articulation. With Multipole networks, MIT can create additional poles (within the cable) for ideal behavior over a broader range than "just cable." With the advent of new micro-componentry, MIT can now provide improved performance without increasing package size for ease of installation. Think of it as getting the best of multiple cables, “all in one package”.

    The Right Technology Matters?

    I hate to burst your bubble, but I really don’t care about the fancy marketing of unique technologies (or snake oil) as it relates to cables. I have some pre-conceived ideas about what works but they are not hard and fast rules. I really don’t care if a wire has a box/network or not. I don’t care about copper versus silver, or gold and palladium versus who knows what. The point is that many of the commercial high-end designs have a basis in science but are predicated on a particular set of criteria and therefore can be substantiated by their science. Bottom line, you still have to listen within the context of your system and find what approach best serves the music in your system.

    Let me share a couple of examples that will highlight my ideas around this topic. I believe system synergy is about matching components to achieve an overall balance of attributes that represent as close of an approximation of live music to your ear as possible. I don’t believe any wire set is truly neutral so therefore every piece of wire is in effect a type of tone control. Different wires emphasize different aspects or characteristics that you perceive need improving in your system. These can be fairly subtle but one brand versus another might add a little more overtone and harmonic structure or offer a broader three dimensional soundstage. Hold on, you say, everyone wants that so what are you talking about?

    I will make a few overstated generalizations to share my concept. If we take an electrostatic speaker with solid state electronics, we have tremendous speed and articulation but we might also have a lighter harmonic structure. In other words, the sound might be on the border line of becoming thin if we don’t choose the right combination of wires. If we decide to go with a brand that emphasizes speed of transmission and leading edge transients, then we take the system further down the road of being viewed as thin and potentially bright. If, on the other hand, we choose a wire that emphasizes harmonic structure and overtone we probably find a better balance with the final sound. It really is all about synergy and finding the right combination of attributes that work for you.

    Sound Quality

    I had a new set of Magnum M1.3 single wire speaker cables on loan from the manufacturer that I decided to try within the context of my system. The cables retail for $6,500 for an eight foot pair. These cables are part of the MIT on-line store product offering.

    My system consists of solid state amp/preamp, a Mod Wright Sony tube CD player, and floor standing dynamic loudspeakers. The CD player helps with adding some warmth and harmonic structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5\' long x 14.25\' wide and has 9\' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    "MIT Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable" "by Brian Boehler" are very vocal about their views which include discussions that the hype around today\'s audiophile cables is all voodoo, snake oil, or simply put, a bunch of BS. If this view is held due to the marketing literature and hype surrounding \'new technologies\', I can understand the general frustration. While sonic differences can be small, they can also be the difference between contrived and real perceived sound in my opinion. Most reviewers want people to respect our perceptions, hearing, and understanding of all things audio. If I declare something as wonderful, revelatory, or hands above the rest, I want others to draw to that conclusion and generally agree with me. Cables can put you in a position where others wonder if you have some wax build up in your ear canal. Go figure!

    MIT History

    Bruce Brisson began designing audio cables in the 1970’s after “hearing” the sonic problems inherent in typical audio cables of the day. In 1981, he licensed the first of many of his designs and patents to Monster Cable. I don’t know about you, but this statement leaves me rather cold and indifferent to his beginnings and early accomplishments. Monster Cable, Noel Lee, and who really cares? In 1984, he founded Music Interface Technologies (MIT) and still heads the company as we know it today. If you have been around audio for long, you will recognize that Bruce has had a strong influence on the industry and has brought forward many concepts and design criteria. In 1989, he created the low-pass filter network concept, designing the patented CVT® and Terminator™ technologies that are contained in the distinctive modules for which all MIT products are known. Many key designers of high end equipment have either directly recommended MIT products or worked with MIT to design their own product recommendations based on MIT modified products.

    Electrical Parameters in Cables

    In order to understand why cables can sound so different and why everyone has a favorite flavor, you need to have a basic knowledge of what makes up a wire. I’m not talking about the actual wire or weave or dielectric but rather the electrical parameters as a result of the design choices. Here is an extremely simplified description of electrical parameters of cables.

    Inductance: Inductance in a speaker cable is largely determined by the area between the conductors. Many speaker cables have conductors that run side by side ("twin-lead"). These conductors are separated by a small distance, so have moderate inductance. Some cables use many small wires that are woven together. This reduces inductance greatly, but at the cost of increased capacitance.

    Capacitance: Capacitance is a function of how close the conductors are to each other. So, to keep the capacitance low, the conductors must be widely separated. Note: this is just the opposite of what we need for low inductance. Woven wires are close together so they have high capacitance.

    Resistance: Resistance is the tendency for the wire in a cable to oppose the flow of current. Most cables are designed to have low resistance so that they don\'t significantly reduce the damping factor of the amplifier.

    The interaction of these three parameters can have a profound influence on what you ultimately hear as music in your room. There is no one right formula for designing these parameters. Depending on your equipment choices such as tubes versus solid state, electrostatic speakers, or passive pre-amps, these all have strong requirements that you should not ignore. Understanding how these electrical parameters all work together within the context of your system can save you a lot of money, wasted time, and general frustration.

    Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable

    The Magnum M1.3 speaker cable has 50 poles or articulation. The cable includes enhancements over its predecessor with an upgrade to MIT’s two proprietary 2C3D technologies: Stable Image Technology (SIT) and Jitter Free Analog (JFA). Ok, that sounds like a bunch of marketing gibberish, so what is 2C3D technology? As the name suggests, 2C3D was engineered to create a believable three dimensional soundstage from a two-channel system. The 2C3D technology offers the optimal balance between detail, imaging, and soundstage (the real question is who defined optimal?). 2C3D makes it easy to identify each of the individual instruments/voices within a well defined soundstage, at any volume level or so the story goes.

    And by the way, what are 50 poles of articulation? This relates to MIT’s Multipole networks. The website states “these networks are wired in parallel, passively correcting the problems that are inherent with ordinary cable designs. All cables have one ideal area where the capacitance, inductance and resistance are balanced for proper articulation. This describes a single-pole of articulation. With Multipole networks, MIT can create additional poles (within the cable) for ideal behavior over a broader range than "just cable." With the advent of new micro-componentry, MIT can now provide improved performance without increasing package size for ease of installation. Think of it as getting the best of multiple cables, “all in one package”.

    The Right Technology Matters?

    I hate to burst your bubble, but I really don’t care about the fancy marketing of unique technologies (or snake oil) as it relates to cables. I have some pre-conceived ideas about what works but they are not hard and fast rules. I really don’t care if a wire has a box/network or not. I don’t care about copper versus silver, or gold and palladium versus who knows what. The point is that many of the commercial high-end designs have a basis in science but are predicated on a particular set of criteria and therefore can be substantiated by their science. Bottom line, you still have to listen within the context of your system and find what approach best serves the music in your system.

    Let me share a couple of examples that will highlight my ideas around this topic. I believe system synergy is about matching components to achieve an overall balance of attributes that represent as close of an approximation of live music to your ear as possible. I don’t believe any wire set is truly neutral so therefore every piece of wire is in effect a type of tone control. Different wires emphasize different aspects or characteristics that you perceive need improving in your system. These can be fairly subtle but one brand versus another might add a little more overtone and harmonic structure or offer a broader three dimensional soundstage. Hold on, you say, everyone wants that so what are you talking about?

    I will make a few overstated generalizations to share my concept. If we take an electrostatic speaker with solid state electronics, we have tremendous speed and articulation but we might also have a lighter harmonic structure. In other words, the sound might be on the border line of becoming thin if we don’t choose the right combination of wires. If we decide to go with a brand that emphasizes speed of transmission and leading edge transients, then we take the system further down the road of being viewed as thin and potentially bright. If, on the other hand, we choose a wire that emphasizes harmonic structure and overtone we probably find a better balance with the final sound. It really is all about synergy and finding the right combination of attributes that work for you.

    Sound Quality

    I had a new set of Magnum M1.3 single wire speaker cables on loan from the manufacturer that I decided to try within the context of my system. The cables retail for $6,500 for an eight foot pair. These cables are part of the MIT on-line store product offering.

    My system consists of solid state amp/preamp, a Mod Wright Sony tube CD player, and floor standing dynamic loudspeakers. The CD player helps with adding some warmth and harmonic structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5\' long x 14.25\' wide and has 9\' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    you need to have a basic knowledge of what makes up a wire. I\'m not talking about the actual wire or weave or dielectric but rather the electrical parameters as a result of the design choices. Here is an extremely simplified description of electrical parameters of cables.

    Inductance: Inductance in a speaker cable is largely determined by the area between the conductors. Many speaker cables have conductors that run side by side ("twin-lead"). These conductors are separated by a small distance, so have moderate inductance. Some cables use many small wires that are woven together. This reduces inductance greatly, but at the cost of increased capacitance.

    Capacitance: Capacitance is a function of how close the conductors are to each other. So, to keep the capacitance low, the conductors must be widely separated. Note: this is just the opposite of what we need for low inductance. Woven wires are close together so they have high capacitance.

    Resistance: Resistance is the tendency for the wire in a cable to oppose the flow of current. Most cables are designed to have low resistance so that they don\'t significantly reduce the damping factor of the amplifier.

    The interaction of these three parameters can have a profound influence on what you ultimately hear as music in your room. There is no one right formula for designing these parameters. Depending on your equipment choices such as tubes versus solid state, electrostatic speakers, or passive pre-amps, these all have strong requirements that you should not ignore. Understanding how these electrical parameters all work together within the context of your system can save you a lot of money, wasted time, and general frustration.

    Magnum 1.3 Speaker Cable

    The Magnum M1.3 speaker cable has 50 poles or articulation. The cable includes enhancements over its predecessor with an upgrade to MIT’s two proprietary 2C3D technologies: Stable Image Technology (SIT) and Jitter Free Analog (JFA). Ok, that sounds like a bunch of marketing gibberish, so what is 2C3D technology? As the name suggests, 2C3D was engineered to create a believable three dimensional soundstage from a two-channel system. The 2C3D technology offers the optimal balance between detail, imaging, and soundstage (the real question is who defined optimal?). 2C3D makes it easy to identify each of the individual instruments/voices within a well defined soundstage, at any volume level or so the story goes.

    And by the way, what are 50 poles of articulation? This relates to MIT’s Multipole networks. The website states “these networks are wired in parallel, passively correcting the problems that are inherent with ordinary cable designs. All cables have one ideal area where the capacitance, inductance and resistance are balanced for proper articulation. This describes a single-pole of articulation. With Multipole networks, MIT can create additional poles (within the cable) for ideal behavior over a broader range than "just cable." With the advent of new micro-componentry, MIT can now provide improved performance without increasing package size for ease of installation. Think of it as getting the best of multiple cables, “all in one package”.

    The Right Technology Matters?

    I hate to burst your bubble, but I really don’t care about the fancy marketing of unique technologies (or snake oil) as it relates to cables. I have some pre-conceived ideas about what works but they are not hard and fast rules. I really don’t care if a wire has a box/network or not. I don’t care about copper versus silver, or gold and palladium versus who knows what. The point is that many of the commercial high-end designs have a basis in science but are predicated on a particular set of criteria and therefore can be substantiated by their science. Bottom line, you still have to listen within the context of your system and find what approach best serves the music in your system.

    Let me share a couple of examples that will highlight my ideas around this topic. I believe system synergy is about matching components to achieve an overall balance of attributes that represent as close of an approximation of live music to your ear as possible. I don’t believe any wire set is truly neutral so therefore every piece of wire is in effect a type of tone control. Different wires emphasize different aspects or characteristics that you perceive need improving in your system. These can be fairly subtle but one brand versus another might add a little more overtone and harmonic structure or offer a broader three dimensional soundstage. Hold on, you say, everyone wants that so what are you talking about?

    I will make a few overstated generalizations to share my concept. If we take an electrostatic speaker with solid state electronics, we have tremendous speed and articulation but we might also have a lighter harmonic structure. In other words, the sound might be on the border line of becoming thin if we don’t choose the right combination of wires. If we decide to go with a brand that emphasizes speed of transmission and leading edge transients, then we take the system further down the road of being viewed as thin and potentially bright. If, on the other hand, we choose a wire that emphasizes harmonic structure and overtone we probably find a better balance with the final sound. It really is all about synergy and finding the right combination of attributes that work for you.

    Sound Quality

    I had a new set of Magnum M1.3 single wire speaker cables on loan from the manufacturer that I decided to try within the context of my system. The cables retail for $6,500 for an eight foot pair. These cables are part of the MIT on-line store product offering.

    My system consists of solid state amp/preamp, a Mod Wright Sony tube CD player, and floor standing dynamic loudspeakers. The CD player helps with adding some warmth and harmonic structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5\' long x 14.25\' wide and has 9\' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    proprietary 2C3D technologies: Stable Image Technology (SIT) and Jitter Free Analog (JFA). Ok, that sounds like a bunch of marketing gibberish, so what is 2C3D technology? As the name suggests, 2C3D was engineered to create a believable three dimensional soundstage from a two-channel system. The 2C3D technology offers the optimal balance between detail, imaging, and soundstage (the real question is who defined optimal?). 2C3D makes it easy to identify each of the individual instruments/voices within a well defined soundstage, at any volume level or so the story goes.

    And by the way, what are 50 poles of articulation? This relates to MIT’s Multipole networks. The website states “these networks are wired in parallel, passively correcting the problems that are inherent with ordinary cable designs. All cables have one ideal area where the capacitance, inductance and resistance are balanced for proper articulation. This describes a single-pole of articulation. With Multipole networks, MIT can create additional poles (within the cable) for ideal behavior over a broader range than "just cable." With the advent of new micro-componentry, MIT can now provide improved performance without increasing package size for ease of installation. Think of it as getting the best of multiple cables, “all in one package”.

    The Right Technology Matters?

    I hate to burst your bubble, but I really don’t care about the fancy marketing of unique technologies (or snake oil) as it relates to cables. I have some pre-conceived ideas about what works but they are not hard and fast rules. I really don’t care if a wire has a box/network or not. I don’t care about copper versus silver, or gold and palladium versus who knows what. The point is that many of the commercial high-end designs have a basis in science but are predicated on a particular set of criteria and therefore can be substantiated by their science. Bottom line, you still have to listen within the context of your system and find what approach best serves the music in your system.

    Let me share a couple of examples that will highlight my ideas around this topic. I believe system synergy is about matching components to achieve an overall balance of attributes that represent as close of an approximation of live music to your ear as possible. I don’t believe any wire set is truly neutral so therefore every piece of wire is in effect a type of tone control. Different wires emphasize different aspects or characteristics that you perceive need improving in your system. These can be fairly subtle but one brand versus another might add a little more overtone and harmonic structure or offer a broader three dimensional soundstage. Hold on, you say, everyone wants that so what are you talking about?

    I will make a few overstated generalizations to share my concept. If we take an electrostatic speaker with solid state electronics, we have tremendous speed and articulation but we might also have a lighter harmonic structure. In other words, the sound might be on the border line of becoming thin if we don’t choose the right combination of wires. If we decide to go with a brand that emphasizes speed of transmission and leading edge transients, then we take the system further down the road of being viewed as thin and potentially bright. If, on the other hand, we choose a wire that emphasizes harmonic structure and overtone we probably find a better balance with the final sound. It really is all about synergy and finding the right combination of attributes that work for you.

    Sound Quality

    I had a new set of Magnum M1.3 single wire speaker cables on loan from the manufacturer that I decided to try within the context of my system. The cables retail for $6,500 for an eight foot pair. These cables are part of the MIT on-line store product offering.

    My system consists of solid state amp/preamp, a Mod Wright Sony tube CD player, and floor standing dynamic loudspeakers. The CD player helps with adding some warmth and harmonic structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5\' long x 14.25\' wide and has 9\' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    Let me share a couple of examples that will highlight my ideas around this topic. I believe system synergy is about matching components to achieve an overall balance of attributes that represent as close of an approximation of live music to your ear as possible. I don't believe any wire set is truly neutral so therefore every piece of wire is in effect a type of tone control. Different wires emphasize different aspects or characteristics that you perceive need improving in your system. These can be fairly subtle but one brand versus another might add a little more overtone and harmonic structure or offer a broader three dimensional soundstage. Hold on, you say, everyone wants that so what are you talking about?

    I will make a few overstated generalizations to share my concept. If we take an electrostatic speaker with solid state electronics, we have tremendous speed and articulation but we might also have a lighter harmonic structure. In other words, the sound might be on the border line of becoming thin if we don’t choose the right combination of wires. If we decide to go with a brand that emphasizes speed of transmission and leading edge transients, then we take the system further down the road of being viewed as thin and potentially bright. If, on the other hand, we choose a wire that emphasizes harmonic structure and overtone we probably find a better balance with the final sound. It really is all about synergy and finding the right combination of attributes that work for you.

    Sound Quality

    I had a new set of Magnum M1.3 single wire speaker cables on loan from the manufacturer that I decided to try within the context of my system. The cables retail for $6,500 for an eight foot pair. These cables are part of the MIT on-line store product offering.

    My system consists of solid state amp/preamp, a Mod Wright Sony tube CD player, and floor standing dynamic loudspeakers. The CD player helps with adding some warmth and harmonic structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5' long x 14.25' wide and has 9' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    structure to the overall sound. My current reference speaker cable is the Acoustic Zen Hologram II which is 6N zero crystal copper (8AWG). While not perfect, it seems to offer a good balance of attributes for the money invested. Compared to some of the more common product names at this price point, I found the Acoustic Zen to be closer to truth and a balance of key attributes in my system.

    Let’s now provide some insight into what I heard that was both positive and negative. First, on the positive side, I found the M1.3 to offer a more convincing three dimensional soundstage than almost any other speaker cable I have auditioned. The sense of air, depth, width, and height were bordering on remarkable. I’m not talking about a hyped hi-fi type affect but one that made the music and recording venue seem more real and substantial than other wires. Instead, I’m talking about a real sense of people and instruments inhabiting space and giving that acoustic space a sense of humanity versus really good hi-fi.

    Another area that had a profound impact on what I heard was how the wire handled upper octave energy, detail, and leading edge transients. The wire has a unique way of having the right balance of detail and upper octave energy without being overly analytical or having leading edge transients that were boarding on hi-fi sounding versus real live music. I found more clearly revealed inner detail such as the turning of a page of sheet music in the third or fourth row of an orchestra. Many wires convey a sound but it doesn’t sound like a page of paper being turned but more like an indistinct noise of some sort that our mind has to fill in versus hearing the sound of real movement within a real space. In spite of hearing more detail revealed within the sound space, I didn’t hear the over hyped leading edge transient or detail that often reveals itself as hi-fi versus a real sound within a given sound space. I heard more of the right information and less of the false or over hyped leading edge detail. This balance of perceived detail is fantastic and in my experience much better than average.

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that “I” had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5' long x 14.25' wide and has 9' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn’t help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn’t get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    I found the M1.3 to be a substantial improvement from about 200-300 hertz up to the top of my tweeters range. In the bass region I had a problem! Please note I stated that 'I' had a problem, not necessarily the cable. I have a dedicated stereo room that measures about 20.5' long x 14.25' wide and has 9' ceilings. All walls are drywall with a suspended concrete floor. Even though it is a dedicated listening room, I have employed a fair amount of room treatments (RealTraps, Marigo, Shakti, and Golden Sound products) to tame the acoustics. Room resonance modes are a fact of life. Many of the products I have used have helped but not eliminated standing waves including areas of suck-out and areas of over exuberance. What I discovered is the M1.3 added more power in areas that didn't help the overall sound. For example, the bass got stronger (not a good thing), didn't get tighter (not a good thing), and seemed out of proportion to the sound of the rest of the speaker. It was kind of like the effect you would get by using a small monitor speaker on stands crossed over to a subwoofer and the match was just wrong. The subwoofer was a little too strong, a little muddy, and just not synced up with the main speaker to give the sensation of a coherent music space. As I stated in the beginning of this review, this is what I heard in the context of my room and system. Your mileage may very well vary!

    Another System/A Different Perspective

    I took the M1.3 cables over to a friends’ house and tried to validate my findings. He has a great room that is substantially larger in cubic volume than my room (probably six to eight times larger). If my theory was right, he should have very different standing waves and more distributed room resonance issues than my system exhibits. Would the bass improve? Would the 200-300 hertz and up performance be just as good as what I experienced? Would the overall sound be positive or would we uncover more negative aspects that I didn’t hear with my system?

    Everything I heard in my system was validated from the lower midrange and up. Based on how I hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I’ve ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    hear and experience music, I found the balance of sound to be exceptional. This system did not have the same bass issues that I experienced with mine. In fact, the bass sounded better on these speakers than I've ever heard in the past. Tight, tuneful, and well balanced with the upper bass/lower midrange. In this system the wire was boarding on amazing. The sense of a three dimensional image was substantially better than what I had heard before. One way to convey this is to use a ball as an example. A truly fleshed out three dimensional image should conjure a completely round ball from all angles. If the sound is short in depth, width, and height then the ball is oblong and out of proportion to a real round ball. I heard a sound that was truly approaching a round ball that was almost fully inflated. If it was oblong or out of proportion it was minor compared to what I often hear from cables.

    One area of discussion was on the sense of leading edge transients. My friend felt his wire did a better job in this area than the MIT 1.3. I understand his point of view, but I don’t agree with his conclusion. I believe a leading edge can be too quick and too defined within the context of a stereo system. If you play the guitar and have your ear right on top of the instrument then your perception of the leading edge transient would be very different from mine as a member of the audience. We each prize and listen for different aspects of sound that define real to each one of us. I don’t play an instrument or sit within an orchestra. My perspective is that of a member of the audience. The leading edge transient is somewhat blunted by the distance, reflections, and people of the audience. To my ears, the MIT caught the right level of leading edge transient. From my perspective, I’m right, but then again I don’t play an instrument. I have a different point of view and reality around this topic. My observation doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what I heard. No two ears hear sounds the in exactly the same manner. You need to listen for yourself and put the sound in context to your perceptions of real sound.

    It should be noted that my friends’ speakers once belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    belonged to me. I designed the speaker concept, picked the components and had some seriously smart friends help me design the crossovers, cabinets, and assemble the complete package. I know my limitations! Needless to say, I am quite familiar with this speaker including its strengths and weaknesses. I never got them to sound as good as I heard them with the M1.3 speaker cable. This experience demonstrated that the room and system context can have a huge impact on our perception of real sound.

    System Synergy Thoughts

    Based on my experiences with this cable, I offer some thoughts for your consideration. If we lump ribbon speakers, electrostatics, planar magnetic, ceramic drivers, diamond drivers, and some high technology metal drivers (beryllium/titanium) together, we have what could be considered very articulate and fast driver characteristics. All of these can have the tendency to be so fast that they can be perceived to be a little on the lean side compared to paper or plastic drivers. If we take paper drivers, plastic drivers, and some lower technology metal drivers (aluminum/hybrids), we have a group of speakers that can be overly rich/ripe and sometimes not perceived as very articulate/fast. While these are gross oversimplifications, they both hold some merit in the marketplace today. My perception is that the MIT M1.3 might do very well with the faster and very articulate driver topologies outlined above. They would add a sense of harmonic structure and flesh out the areas where these drivers can be perceived as lean. The M1.3 might take a paper/plastic driver topology and attempt to add additional harmonic structure and flesh the sound out in a way that takes the sound in the wrong direction (overly ripe and less articulation). In this last example, we might want to consider a speaker cable with some seriously fast propagation delay that would balance the speaker to add some much needed speed. As I’ve point out in the past, system synergy is extremely important. All wires are tone controls to some extent; you just need to know which direction you will turn the control to get the sound you crave.

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler

    Conclusion

    I really liked how the M1.3 worked within the context of my system from 200-300 hertz and up. It opened a window on the soundstage that was deeper, wider, and higher than before. The sound was more fleshed out and it added some additional harmonic structure to the sound and made it feel more like tube equipment in the critical midrange. The highs were enhanced without grain or edginess and came across as more real. The bass was stronger but created problems that could not be overcome in my room. When we put the results in perspective to the value it offers and the dollars it takes to achieve this type of performance, I take some pause. In my personal view of value, I tend to equate the speaker wire as about 25 to 33% of the retail price of the speaker I purchased. Based on this formula, I would need speakers that retailed for around $25,000 to meet my personal criteria. If you have speakers in this price range I would definitely give them a listen. If your view of value is different than mine, please use your personal formula and give it a try.

    I have heard many cable sets over the years, but few within the context of my system. You really can’t judge cables based on what you hear at a show or a dealer’s showroom. What counts is how they sound in your system and in your environment. MIT’s view of “real” sound may line up well with your perceptions or it may lead you to consider other alternatives. Discovery is important to achieving success in this critical area. Best of luck on your journey and if you have a chance, give the M1.3’s a try and see how you respond to their sound. I sure was impressed!

    Brian Boehler


  • Audio Note U.K. DAC 5 Signature
    The Audio Note U.K. DAC 5 Signature. It is not everyday we get to peek inside a $75K DAC. But, for your viewing pleasure... we are posting several photos. Listening impressions forthcoming... "Audio Note DAC 5 Signature"
All Articles
  • Denon DBP-4010UDCI Universal Blu-ray player
    Denon DBP-4010UDCI Universal Blu-ray player

    Denon has long been a well-respected leader in the disc player market, producing some excellent universal disc players over the years. Just a few years ago, a universal disc player needed to tackle CD, SACD, DVD-Video and DVD-Audio. Today’s disc player must now add Blu-ray to the list in order to claim the title of universal disc player. Such is the case for Denon's new BDP-4010UDCI. Read our review to see how it performs.

    Read more...

  • Yamaha BD-S1065 Blu-ray Player
    Yamaha BD-S1065

    The BD-S1065 is one of Yamaha’s most recent Blu-ray models (the other being the BD-S1900), and is also the least expensive model in their lineup. It is not a universal player, instead focusing simply on Blu-ray. Let's see how it performed.

    Read more...

  • CD Music Reviews - March, 2010
    SECRETS CD REVIEWS March 2010 Singer/songwriter Yasmin Levy has built an estimable reputation as a champion of Ladino music, the ancient music of the Sephardic Jews of Spain. Singing Ladino, Beduin, and original Ladino-like songs, sometimes imbued with Turkish or Flamenco influences, Levy is on a mission to preserve and promote a language and culture facing extinction.

    Read more...

  • Movie Renter's Guide - March, 2010
    movie-march-2010-teaserGamer (Blu-ray), Give 'Em Hell Malone (Blu-ray), Law Abiding Citizen (Blu-ray), Couples Retreat (Blu-ray)

    Read more...

  • Pioneer S-2EX Monitor-sized Speakers
    pioneer-s-2ex-speakers-teaser

    My first introduction to high end audio was back in college. During my freshman year (1975) I came into contact with a kid across the hall from me who owned a Pioneer tape deck. I remember well the wooden side panels and dancing dials. Even though I can not remember the model, I remember that it was able to record on CrO2 tape for the highest fidelity. Does anyone else remember those tapes? Over the years, I have owned a Pioneer CTF-650 tape deck and at least one Pioneer CD/SACD player. But even back then, I knew that Pioneer was really only mid-fi. In fact, Pioneer was competing with JVC, Technics, Sansui and others in the entry to mid level equipment market place. Sure, today the Elite series is pretty good, but I still can’t shake the feeling that it

    Read more...

Termékek

Twitter Csatorna

Ezt hallgatjuk:

Mai időjárás

Derűs

-2°C

Budapest

Derűs

Páratartalom: 59%

Szél: K 14 km/ó

  • K Részben napos

    3°C -4°C

  • Sze Felhős

    4°C -2°C

  • Cs Előfordulhat havazás

    2°C -6°C

  • P Előfordulhat havazás

    3°C -3°C

TV műsor



Webáruház login:






Ügyfélszolgálat

Ügyfélszolgálat MSN: Offline Email: info@bartimexaudio.hu Telefon: (+36) 20 9533324

Webáruház kosár

Az Ön kosara pillanatnyilag üres.Új termék
Az Ön kosara pillanatnyilag üres.

Hírlevél kezelő

Iratkozzon fel hírlevelünkre, hogy első kézből értesüljön akcióinkról, újdonságainkról. Feliratkozását egy egyszeri 4%-os kedvezményre jogosító kuponnal honoráljuk, melyet webáruházunkban használhat fel.
Bartimex Audio hirlevél


LINKSTER.HU :: Magyarország Legtutibb Kezdõlapja! :o)

Webáruház Katalógus

real_stereo_small

Látogassa meg Bartimex Audio Webáruház a ShopMania weboldalon

Webshop.wyw.hu - Webáruházak

Magyar Honlap Linkek

My Google Page Rank

Items.hu Linkgyűjtemény

Bartimex Audio hírek RSS
Bartimex hírek