• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Bang for the buck interconnect alternative to my Audioquest Rubies

onwardjames said:
Where can these be obtained, Roadrash??

EDIT - Found them....of course, on that auction site. Yeah, price isn't too bad.
Click to expand...
That's exactly where I found the Kimbers, the PBJs and 8TC speaker cables that are in my main system. The Silver Serpents were purchased from AKer Bostown on BarterTown, and I paid roughly 50 percent of retail for the RCAs from both sites.

With regards to your being able to tell a difference in the cables, you might very well be surprised.
 
Last edited:
Roadrash said:
With regards to your being able to tell a difference in the cables, you might very well be surprised.
Click to expand...

I will be pleasantly surprised, if that happens, and welcome it.

However, I'm happy if it doesn't.

If/when I get that new job, and I'm back to my flammable horticulture, I've no doubt I will hear something. Never heard a speaker grill that didn't impede sound, especially when I've had a bit of my greens (not that this is a litmus that I have a golden ear, because I no longer do, and likely never did).
 
Just taken the plunge and bought a pair of Van Den Hul ‘The Rock’ to replace my Van Den Hul ‘The First’ between my CD Player and Pre and am very pleased with the results. Better separation, and definition. Worth considering. Paid £279 as they were an open box sale. Cheers.
 
Apparently my last post constituted a "negative opinion".

My central point was this: If folks are looking for "bang for buck" solutions on sound tinkering: I often wonder why graphics equalizers seem underrepresented in the system conversation.

The reviewer in this article mentions noticing a clarity improvement for £45 Atlas Element cables, over basic cables, and a slight improvement for £125 Hyper Integra. I thought that this article was well written and offered some candid perspectives from cable producers and academics.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technol...es-are-expensive-cables-a-waste-of-money.html
 
Tommy2D said:
I often wonder why graphics equalizers seem underrepresented in the system conversation.
Click to expand...
To my ears, the frequency imbalance (even when set to 0/flat--they are anything but flat unless they completely switch out of the signal path when set to zero) and phase issues of graphic EQs are obvious in my system. Others with high-end systems do not use them for similar reasons--we like having the most direct signal path that we can. And you'll never see one at an audio show or in an audio dealer's showroom. EQs today are used more for sound reinforcement or studio use, so you would see those at "pro audio" dealers instead.

I think if I ever had to use any type of EQ, it would probably be parametric--they still have issues, but you'll find that recording engineers tend to use parametric EQ, and if used properly, only in a subtractive way (cut, never boost). And their parametric EQs probably cost 10-20x what consumer models do.

I found as I've gone up the quality ladder in my system, I haven't even needed tone controls, let alone any kind of EQ.

But keep in mind that this hobby of ours is very much different folks/different strokes--if someone likes using an EQ in their system, more power to 'em. There are plenty out there for all sorts of applications, at all different prices.
 
Wildcat said:
I found as I've gone up the quality ladder in my system, I haven't even needed tone controls, let alone any kind of EQ.

But keep in mind that this hobby of ours is very much different folks/different strokes--if someone likes using an EQ in their system, more power to 'em. There are plenty out there for all sorts of applications, at all different prices.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed response. I completely understand the goal of maintaining a clear/flat audio path: with the underlying goal of obtaining a sound that closes matches the artists/engineer's original intent. I can also understand trying to find the best possible cable to ensure that the signal is not compromised between components. Personally, I'm not in that camp but I can still appreciate the goal.

If flat EQ is your goal, then a Graphics Equalizer would be a poor solution. I've just seen some people describe cables as providing "warmth" or other qualities that seem to be the opposite of flat equalization. Of course, subjective terms can always lead to misunderstanding. I suppose that additional "warmth" could be a component of a "flatter" EQ if the starting point was biased towards higher frequencies, etc. I only mentioned a GE for the benefit of folks who might be open to considering all options.

Steve Guttenberg produced a few videos dealing with the Graphics Equalizer question, which I think treat the overall question fairly. Since I don't have anything further to add, on cables: I'll leave this thread alone ;)
 
Last edited:
@Wildcat @Tommy2D

The EQ debate is the proverbial dead horse...my take is there are some scenarios where it’s appropriate, some where it is not...and I have both. I’m not really a fan of GEQ’s any longer, but I did pick up a little Schiit Loki and man, that thing is a great little tool to have around.
 
Some might think or suggest that swapping cables has the effect of adjusting an EQ, but that idea would be wrong. When I tried my very first speaker cable upgrade(from 12 gauge stranded copper, OFC) the imaging improved. So did the accuracy of the highs, and the effect was to have a better focus or clearer sounding soundstage. This was with Audioquest Type 4 that I bought with by-the-foot pricing.

I've got both Audioquest interconnects and Morrow right now. With my present speakers, the Morrows (MA3 and 2 MA5) are superior to the Audioquest Sydney. But either way, the design approach of having individually insulated solid core conductors, is what I prefer. I just bought an MA4, to be delivered in a week or so. It'll be my first cable from their new silver-free design.

Audioquest, and my other brand, Wireworld, both make good stuff, but it gets pretty expensive fast. Morrow mid tier stuff like the MA3 and 4 offer better bang for buck IMO. With their various discount programs and easy-pay plans, it's worth a look.
 
runnin' said:
Some might think or suggest that swapping cables has the effect of adjusting an EQ, but that idea would be wrong. When I tried my very first speaker cable upgrade(from 12 gauge stranded copper, OFC) the imaging improved. So did the accuracy of the highs, and the effect was to have a better focus or clearer sounding soundstage. This was with Audioquest Type 4 that I bought with by-the-foot pricing.

I've got both Audioquest interconnects and Morrow right now. With my present speakers, the Morrows (MA3 and 2 MA5) are superior to the Audioquest Sydney. But either way, the design approach of having individually insulated solid core conductors, is what I prefer. I just bought an MA4, to be delivered in a week or so. It'll be my first cable from their new silver-free design.

Audioquest, and my other brand, Wireworld, both make good stuff, but it gets pretty expensive fast. Morrow mid tier stuff like the MA3 and 4 offer better bang for buck IMO. With their various discount programs and easy-pay plans, it's worth a look.
Click to expand...

Agreed and it's a common mistake to believe that it's only about frequency balance, I think..
In general it's about improved resolution ...
Maybe a little closer to the real thing ...although some cables do skew the frequency balance a bit.
And there is no one size fits all solution.. but in my systems the higher quality interconnects have definitely made a notable difference ..
 
I have been impressed with the resolution of my latest upgrade so I have bought a second pair for my pre to power. Separation and resolution have improved which has a beneficial impact on the soundstage. It is difficult to describe but the difference from VDH The First to The Rock is a perceived increase in instrument separations throughout the soundstage at all frequencies. As I am chasing detail this result was a win for me. Cables for me allow fine tuning of my system. Cheers.
 
I have been using the Knukonceptz Krystal cables. They are well built and I have been very pleased with them. It's really easy to evaluate any cable. All you have to do is insert it in the tape monitor loop and switch the tape monitor in and out. If you can't hear any difference, that's a good cable.

I was looking for very flexible cables with short connectors and these Karma V3 cables are very good (http://www.knukonceptz.com/home-the...3-twisted-2-channel-coaxial-rca-cable-3-feet/). The "Krystal Kable" (http://www.knukonceptz.com/home-the...al-kable-2-channel-1m-twisted-pair-rca-cable/) is the upgraded model, but I prefer the Karma V3's because of the flexibility. The branding of these cables is the worst -- if I live to be 100 I still won't remember the name or the spelling of the brand or models, but I like the cables a lot.

I can't comment on sound quality. I'm not dismissive of cable difference as it relates to sound quality, but I can't claim to have heard a huge difference between quality cables, so I'll leave that assessment to others.[/QUOTE]
 
I have to ask myself is it the placebo effect that I hear when I carry out a - b testing with interconnects. Maybe or maybe not. I do think it is the latter. Is it just a resistance drop in the said cable then maybe. Is there a difference in capacitance? Maybe. I suspect there are arguments for and against backed up by scientific evidence in both camps. It is a very interesting subject matter imo. Cheers.
 
Akustic said:
Agreed and it's a common mistake to believe that it's only about frequency balance, I think..
In general it's about improved resolution ...
Maybe a little closer to the real thing ...although some cables do skew the frequency balance a bit.
And there is no one size fits all solution.. but in my systems the higher quality interconnects have definitely made a notable difference ..
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is no one size fits all. If one has good quality after market cables already, replacing them with another brand has no guarantee of improving things. It's much easier to get improvements if you're starting off with basic cheapo IC's or speaker cables. I really do like Morrow though.
 
runnin' said:
Yeah, there is no one size fits all. If one has good quality after market cables already, replacing them with another brand has no guarantee of improving things. It's much easier to get improvements if you're starting off with basic cheapo IC's or speaker cables. I really do like Morrow though.
Click to expand...

Totally agree ..
There's usually a big bump up in quality from garden variety, followed by a lot of sideways movement that costs too much .. but can be worth it if you hit the magical middle...
 
But it also pays to compare garden variety interconnects ..
I have found some surprising differences amongst them ..
I found surprisingly good non-coaxial interconnects in the auto stereo section of a big box electronics store ...
Once I realized how good they were, I went back bought all the last 4 of them hanging on the rack ..
Good thing cause they never reappeared ..
 
I found some used Morrow cables on one of the audio gear classifieds...three sets of MA1 interconnects and a pair of shotgun SP2 speaker cables. Got everything for right at $200, so IMO that’s pretty budget friendly. Looking forward to giving them a go.
 
tomlinmgt said:
I found some used Morrow cables on one of the audio gear classifieds...three sets of MA1 interconnects and a pair of shotgun SP2 speaker cables. Got everything for right at $200, so IMO that’s pretty budget friendly. Looking forward to giving them a go.
Click to expand...

If you go to Morrow Audio website (under help) .. there is a free pdf download of a cables owners manual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom