MX135 comments
- Thread starter fatcat
- Start date
McGlentosh
proud McOwner since 1978
Ron,
You said "...push the home button on your remote and you have 5 seconds to control the settings with the navigation keys. You can adjust width, panorama or dimension. The center button will turn panorama on and off, the up down keys set Dimension which is the forward or rear bias of the sound field, and the left right keys adjust center width.
All this sounds great; however, the (Harmony) remote for my MX135 doesn't have a Home button, and I tried pushing all the others, to no avail. What am I doing wrong?
Glen
You said "...push the home button on your remote and you have 5 seconds to control the settings with the navigation keys. You can adjust width, panorama or dimension. The center button will turn panorama on and off, the up down keys set Dimension which is the forward or rear bias of the sound field, and the left right keys adjust center width.
All this sounds great; however, the (Harmony) remote for my MX135 doesn't have a Home button, and I tried pushing all the others, to no avail. What am I doing wrong?
Glen
McGlentosh
proud McOwner since 1978
Ron,
Sorry, I missed your previous reply: "Gee, I haven't looked at this thread for a while. McGlen, the home button is on the other remote, the HRO44. Did your MX135 come with both? If not let me know."
No, my MX135 came only with the Harmony remote (smaller, "curvy"). The remote for my MX134 was different (larger, rectangular), but I had to trade that in when I traded in the 134.
Did the HRO44 replace the Harmony? How can I get one?
Glen
Sorry, I missed your previous reply: "Gee, I haven't looked at this thread for a while. McGlen, the home button is on the other remote, the HRO44. Did your MX135 come with both? If not let me know."
No, my MX135 came only with the Harmony remote (smaller, "curvy"). The remote for my MX134 was different (larger, rectangular), but I had to trade that in when I traded in the 134.
Did the HRO44 replace the Harmony? How can I get one?
Glen
Break In
Jimmy-
In my experience, everything "breaks in". Every piece of new equipment I've ever bought seems to change sound over the first hours of use, even McIntosh. I got a C-200 and it definitely broke in. Then I got pairs of MC501s and MC1201s a few months ago, and even they broke in. I expected the effect would be minor, and it was and it wasn't. With electronics, the basic character of the sound seems to remain, but it does go through changes. Then I changed speaker cables and they broke in, then I changed interconnects and they broke in... or at least I think they did.
Literally, it's taken months for the sound to settle down and become constant. The good news is that it does seem to get better during break-in, and not worse.
Frankly, I'm not the right person to explain break-in, because I don't know what all the electrical effects in the equipment are. On the other hand, I've read that the effects are measurable, and that they are predictable from the physics involved. As to cables, the measurable effects are vanishingly small, and I wind up wondering if it's the cable breaking in or my ears breaking down.
My simplistic approach is that I try not to judge a product until it's had a reasonable chance to break in. Then, it sounds like it sounds and I either like it or not. Which is why they don't let me write reviews!
Jimmy-
In my experience, everything "breaks in". Every piece of new equipment I've ever bought seems to change sound over the first hours of use, even McIntosh. I got a C-200 and it definitely broke in. Then I got pairs of MC501s and MC1201s a few months ago, and even they broke in. I expected the effect would be minor, and it was and it wasn't. With electronics, the basic character of the sound seems to remain, but it does go through changes. Then I changed speaker cables and they broke in, then I changed interconnects and they broke in... or at least I think they did.
Literally, it's taken months for the sound to settle down and become constant. The good news is that it does seem to get better during break-in, and not worse.
Frankly, I'm not the right person to explain break-in, because I don't know what all the electrical effects in the equipment are. On the other hand, I've read that the effects are measurable, and that they are predictable from the physics involved. As to cables, the measurable effects are vanishingly small, and I wind up wondering if it's the cable breaking in or my ears breaking down.
My simplistic approach is that I try not to judge a product until it's had a reasonable chance to break in. Then, it sounds like it sounds and I either like it or not. Which is why they don't let me write reviews!
JimmyNeutron
Super Member
Hey Nego, you haven't been reading The Absolute Sound have you? 
I've been around electronics long enough to hear break-in, and it usually is heard on mechanical equipment, ie, speakers or tube equipment, but never cables as they are, or should be a constant. I have tried many, many cables in my systems, and they are very revealing systems, and although I have heard many differences among different cables, I've never heard a cable to sound different over time. Many people here have tried that same experiment and have come up with the same results - cables don't break in. There is no evidence to support this either, other than what one person "thinks" he hears, which of course refers to faith. Cryogenically freezing cables, or microwaving cables, or lifting them up off the carpet, or arranging them in a North/South position carries no evidence of a change in signal - other than what one thinks he hears. Audio equipment performance is not, thankfully, based on faith but on scientific proof that measures a components performance. Anything that is not proven about a component, but instead is relayed as a belief, is nothing more than snake-oil. Unless a manufacture expresses that his cables sound better after being broken in over time and backs that statement up with scientific proof, I will not buy the cable, or the ocean front property in Arizona from him.
But then again, this is all just my opinion, and like assholes, we all have one. If he hears a difference, who am I to tell him he does'nt. I like this hobby enough to try little experiments like these, which is what he is doing. He will learn, in time, what is real and what is illusion. :thmbsp:
I've been around electronics long enough to hear break-in, and it usually is heard on mechanical equipment, ie, speakers or tube equipment, but never cables as they are, or should be a constant. I have tried many, many cables in my systems, and they are very revealing systems, and although I have heard many differences among different cables, I've never heard a cable to sound different over time. Many people here have tried that same experiment and have come up with the same results - cables don't break in. There is no evidence to support this either, other than what one person "thinks" he hears, which of course refers to faith. Cryogenically freezing cables, or microwaving cables, or lifting them up off the carpet, or arranging them in a North/South position carries no evidence of a change in signal - other than what one thinks he hears. Audio equipment performance is not, thankfully, based on faith but on scientific proof that measures a components performance. Anything that is not proven about a component, but instead is relayed as a belief, is nothing more than snake-oil. Unless a manufacture expresses that his cables sound better after being broken in over time and backs that statement up with scientific proof, I will not buy the cable, or the ocean front property in Arizona from him.
But then again, this is all just my opinion, and like assholes, we all have one.
If he hears a difference, who am I to tell him he does'nt. I like this hobby enough to try little experiments like these, which is what he is doing. He will learn, in time, what is real and what is illusion. :thmbsp:
ron-c
Addicted Member
The majority of cable in a system is in the loudspeaker crossover coils and voice coils. These coils all have power ratings of course which really match up with what power is on the speaker spec sheet. A lot of very well regarded high end speakers are rated at 500 or a 1000 watts with 100 watt coils in the crossover network. A set of speaker wires that cost a few grand will fix this for shure...LOL.
How about those wires inside the vacume tubes and transistors? Still laughing..
Ron-C
How about those wires inside the vacume tubes and transistors? Still laughing..
Ron-C
Why worry?
Jimmy and Ron-
Basically, I agree with the idea that there's not a lot of break-in change in equipment or cables, and while I have quality cables in my systems (Tributaries), I will never pay thousands for some mystical uber-cable.
Let's understand, there's plenty of science behind cables; ask anyone who's had to recable their office for Cat6 and noticed that the only difference between them and the old Cat5e is the insulator and the rate of twist in the wire. The controversy is whether the differences are meaningful in the audio range, and can be heard at all. The controversy persists because too many people hear changes to ascribe the entire effect to mass hysteria, including a lot of people who aren't involved in audio and don't have a bias.
I'm not technical enough to separate the snake-oil from the science, but what made me a limited believer was my own skepticism. With one exception, my degrees are in science and engineeering, and I would have bet anything that no such effect could occur. Then, I began the audio trek and scoffed loudly at cables, break-in, magic bricks, etc. I still scoff at magic bricks, but despite my best intentions, I've experienced break-in changes and have been embarrassed at hearing changes in sound when I've changed cables in my system for other reasons (swapping cables to allow moving components in the racks).
Jimmy, however, makes a very good point, which is that manufacturers should make sure that break-in change either doesn't occur or occurs at the factory. I suppose the counterpoint is Ron's view that all cables sound alike and equipment doesn't break in, so manufacturers can ignore it.
For me, the bottom line of all this is that audio is still not entirely a science, and as I said, rather than agonize over the whole thing, it's easiest to just let everything burn in a while before you try to evaluate. It costs nothing, and eliminates an unquantifiable risk. Now, this time I promise, no more cable talk!
Jimmy and Ron-
Basically, I agree with the idea that there's not a lot of break-in change in equipment or cables, and while I have quality cables in my systems (Tributaries), I will never pay thousands for some mystical uber-cable.
Let's understand, there's plenty of science behind cables; ask anyone who's had to recable their office for Cat6 and noticed that the only difference between them and the old Cat5e is the insulator and the rate of twist in the wire. The controversy is whether the differences are meaningful in the audio range, and can be heard at all. The controversy persists because too many people hear changes to ascribe the entire effect to mass hysteria, including a lot of people who aren't involved in audio and don't have a bias.
I'm not technical enough to separate the snake-oil from the science, but what made me a limited believer was my own skepticism. With one exception, my degrees are in science and engineeering, and I would have bet anything that no such effect could occur. Then, I began the audio trek and scoffed loudly at cables, break-in, magic bricks, etc. I still scoff at magic bricks, but despite my best intentions, I've experienced break-in changes and have been embarrassed at hearing changes in sound when I've changed cables in my system for other reasons (swapping cables to allow moving components in the racks).
Jimmy, however, makes a very good point, which is that manufacturers should make sure that break-in change either doesn't occur or occurs at the factory. I suppose the counterpoint is Ron's view that all cables sound alike and equipment doesn't break in, so manufacturers can ignore it.
For me, the bottom line of all this is that audio is still not entirely a science, and as I said, rather than agonize over the whole thing, it's easiest to just let everything burn in a while before you try to evaluate. It costs nothing, and eliminates an unquantifiable risk. Now, this time I promise, no more cable talk!
Extraordinary Popular Delusions, and the Madness of Crowds
While I'm fulfilling my usual role of making Ron laugh at me, here's an off-topic item of interest regarding the role of mass hysteria in finance:
Years ago, when I first began investing, I asked the guy who trained me (formerly one of the managers of Quantum Fund) what I could read for background. He told me to buy any of the books on market arithmetic, as they were all similar, then to buy a book written in the early 1900s by Charles McKay: "Extraordinary Popular Delusions, and the Madness of Crowds". I'm told it's still the best explanation of market psychology, and can be found in the library of every major market guru.
I wonder what McKay would have thought of cable sound and break-in changes? Heh... probably just what Ron and Jimmy do!
While I'm fulfilling my usual role of making Ron laugh at me, here's an off-topic item of interest regarding the role of mass hysteria in finance:
Years ago, when I first began investing, I asked the guy who trained me (formerly one of the managers of Quantum Fund) what I could read for background. He told me to buy any of the books on market arithmetic, as they were all similar, then to buy a book written in the early 1900s by Charles McKay: "Extraordinary Popular Delusions, and the Madness of Crowds". I'm told it's still the best explanation of market psychology, and can be found in the library of every major market guru.
I wonder what McKay would have thought of cable sound and break-in changes? Heh... probably just what Ron and Jimmy do!
jrsystems
Super Member
Sorry to open this debate. I too was a firm skeptic of cable difference and more so of break-in. But that system changed drastically over a few days and the big variable was the new cables. I did spend a lot on my cables and wasn't sure what to expect, but felt that the investment was worthy of my fine equipment. I wouldn't put cheap tires on a Porsche either. It does seem very logical that the quality of the cables makes a difference just as the quality of everything in the signal path makes a difference, if it didn't we would all be wasting a lot of money on this equipment. However I am shocked that break-in makes a difference and I probably wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it. Interestingly, as much difference as I heard with this break in period I could hear little difference when doing a direct A-B between a CD in a MVP861 and the same song on the hard drive of a MS300. I was expecting a far greater difference there.
Anyway, I'm not at all obsessing over it, I am not an engineer and don't want to try and figure this out, I will not be trying other cables, and I love the way my system sounds. End of cable talk. Sorry to all.
-JR-
Anyway, I'm not at all obsessing over it, I am not an engineer and don't want to try and figure this out, I will not be trying other cables, and I love the way my system sounds. End of cable talk. Sorry to all.
-JR-
JimmyNeutron
Super Member
Negotiableterms said:
Nego, you're absolutely right in that statement. Like I've said before, regardless of what we believe in, science or faith, it all comes down to having fun in this hobby of audio. Nothing wrong with trying a few tweaks every now and then. :thmbsp:
BTW Nego, have you done any A/B comparisons between your Tribu....and Monster Cable of similar design? What where the sound qualities of the Tribs. I'm curious because the upgrade bug has hit me and I want to try new cables in my system.
Wire and cables
Not to “fan the fires” of the Magic Cable debate, but…
Has anyone noticed that McIntosh uses just plain old wire within their products? No grain-oriented, silver-coated or otherwise “magic” wire? There is probably a greater length of plain wire within one autoformer than would be used between any two components. And, a chain is no stronger than its weakest link.
I’m happy with plain cables (with good connectors).
VintageMac
Not to “fan the fires” of the Magic Cable debate, but…
Has anyone noticed that McIntosh uses just plain old wire within their products? No grain-oriented, silver-coated or otherwise “magic” wire? There is probably a greater length of plain wire within one autoformer than would be used between any two components. And, a chain is no stronger than its weakest link.
I’m happy with plain cables (with good connectors).
VintageMac
Comparisons? Moi?
Jimmy-
OK...one more cable comment, then I'm cut off! You have to understand that until recently, I didn't believe in cable sound at all. I did believe (from painful experience) that the shielding has to be good, and the connections have to be tight, but that was about it. Most of my cables were Monster Cable Interlink-400 or the like, purchased at deep discount. The quest for eBay deals and discounts lead me to a pair of Tributaries SCA-100 and a pair of Kimber Hero. That's the first time I got to play with cables. I could barely tell the difference between the Tribs and the Heros (and not repeatably), but the Monster Cable left for good. Since then I've managed to get great deals on enough Trib cable to do the critical parts of my main system (why waste money on cabling the XM tuner?) but that's about it.
To make matters worse, I can barely tell you how the Tribs and Heros differed from the Monster, other than that with the Tribs in, I got goosebumps occasionally because it sounded so real, and with the Monster Cable, I never did. No science involved, just repeatable subjective effect, and one entirely beyond my bias to control. That said, when it sounds that real is when I love it the most, and I don't really care if it's measurable or not, or if it's the case that the internal wiring of my MC501s' autoformers is entirely made of used chicken-wire.
Now, this may mean I'm delusional, or deaf, but as I tried to say earlier, I do this for enjoyment, and the fact that I can't explain why one setup sounds more real to me than another is entirely beside the point. My wife, reading this, agrees entirely that I'm deaf, but likes my system much more the way it sounds now. No wonder I love her!
JimmyNeutron said:
Jimmy-
OK...one more cable comment, then I'm cut off! You have to understand that until recently, I didn't believe in cable sound at all. I did believe (from painful experience) that the shielding has to be good, and the connections have to be tight, but that was about it. Most of my cables were Monster Cable Interlink-400 or the like, purchased at deep discount. The quest for eBay deals and discounts lead me to a pair of Tributaries SCA-100 and a pair of Kimber Hero. That's the first time I got to play with cables. I could barely tell the difference between the Tribs and the Heros (and not repeatably), but the Monster Cable left for good. Since then I've managed to get great deals on enough Trib cable to do the critical parts of my main system (why waste money on cabling the XM tuner?) but that's about it.
To make matters worse, I can barely tell you how the Tribs and Heros differed from the Monster, other than that with the Tribs in, I got goosebumps occasionally because it sounded so real, and with the Monster Cable, I never did. No science involved, just repeatable subjective effect, and one entirely beyond my bias to control. That said, when it sounds that real is when I love it the most, and I don't really care if it's measurable or not, or if it's the case that the internal wiring of my MC501s' autoformers is entirely made of used chicken-wire.
Now, this may mean I'm delusional, or deaf, but as I tried to say earlier, I do this for enjoyment, and the fact that I can't explain why one setup sounds more real to me than another is entirely beside the point. My wife, reading this, agrees entirely that I'm deaf, but likes my system much more the way it sounds now. No wonder I love her!
JimmyNeutron
Super Member
Tribs it is. Do you know of a place to get them at reasonable prices? I'm looking for 3 and 6 ft lengths to run between pre/pro and amp and between CD and pre/pro. Any sugesstions?
ron-c
Addicted Member
Note, I did not say cables can not sound different from one another. How one chooses to change the sound of their system is up to the individual. You can use cables or maybe some kind of EQ. The effect is the same but the cost and flexibility may vary greatly.
If you approach cables in an Ohm's Law kind of way I would look for the following..
Speaker cable should be of a sufficient gage to carry the power without adding resistance. This will get us to 12 gage or larger.
Speaker wires that use multiple conductors in a spiral wound arrangement will pick up less interference. This has been known for decades in microphone cable design. 'Quad' cable and other designs use this starting at under $1.00 per foot. Kimber, Canare, and many others use the multiple wire design. Cloth and PTE insulators with a heavy jacket will assure long life and minimum handling noise. Remember that induced noise in a speaker cable will get back into the amps feedback network, be amplified and effect the sound.
Good connectors are just that, good. WBT, Canare, Neutric, and many others make fine ones. A sloppy or loose speaker wire connection will result in many percents distortion. Clean and tight is the key.
Digital and video cables need to be exact in their impedance. 75 ohms is not 150 ohms. Video cables should be silver plated copper in a co-ax arrangement. All production and broadcast equipment has used this design since WW-II.
Balanced audio cables are far more neutral than Co-Ax. many find balanced cabled 'boring' since they do their job without coloration. If you want to play the cable game stay away from balanced. Anyone notice how the high end cables stay away from talking about their balanced cables? Hum, maybe because they all sound the same!
Ron-C
If you approach cables in an Ohm's Law kind of way I would look for the following..
Speaker cable should be of a sufficient gage to carry the power without adding resistance. This will get us to 12 gage or larger.
Speaker wires that use multiple conductors in a spiral wound arrangement will pick up less interference. This has been known for decades in microphone cable design. 'Quad' cable and other designs use this starting at under $1.00 per foot. Kimber, Canare, and many others use the multiple wire design. Cloth and PTE insulators with a heavy jacket will assure long life and minimum handling noise. Remember that induced noise in a speaker cable will get back into the amps feedback network, be amplified and effect the sound.
Good connectors are just that, good. WBT, Canare, Neutric, and many others make fine ones. A sloppy or loose speaker wire connection will result in many percents distortion. Clean and tight is the key.
Digital and video cables need to be exact in their impedance. 75 ohms is not 150 ohms. Video cables should be silver plated copper in a co-ax arrangement. All production and broadcast equipment has used this design since WW-II.
Balanced audio cables are far more neutral than Co-Ax. many find balanced cabled 'boring' since they do their job without coloration. If you want to play the cable game stay away from balanced. Anyone notice how the high end cables stay away from talking about their balanced cables? Hum, maybe because they all sound the same!
Ron-C
Balanced Comments
Hmmm... Ron brings up an interesting point. When I got the C-200, I recabled the whole thing with balanced (Trib SCA-200), and liked the sound even more. I've never compared other balanced cables, so I've very reason to believe Ron's right. Note also that Ratshack doesn't really sell balanced cables. In fact, because they're largely confined to high-end and pro gear, there aren't a lot of junk balanced cables around at all.
I got all of my Tribs on eBay. There's used cables that go for 50% off and then there's one guy who occasionally has 25% off sales on new Tribs. I got the 6m pair from him at a really great price. Name might be "wiremeister"? I wasn't in a hurry, and got good pricing in a fairly short time. Good luck!
Moderators, I'm proud to say we've conducted an entire cable discussion without a single vile comment or insult. Not that I'm suggesting we continue!
ron-c said:
Hmmm... Ron brings up an interesting point. When I got the C-200, I recabled the whole thing with balanced (Trib SCA-200), and liked the sound even more. I've never compared other balanced cables, so I've very reason to believe Ron's right. Note also that Ratshack doesn't really sell balanced cables. In fact, because they're largely confined to high-end and pro gear, there aren't a lot of junk balanced cables around at all.
I got all of my Tribs on eBay. There's used cables that go for 50% off and then there's one guy who occasionally has 25% off sales on new Tribs. I got the 6m pair from him at a really great price. Name might be "wiremeister"? I wasn't in a hurry, and got good pricing in a fairly short time. Good luck!
Moderators, I'm proud to say we've conducted an entire cable discussion without a single vile comment or insult. Not that I'm suggesting we continue!
What I find interesting is that in pro audio, the cables are a part of the cross over network. My friend owns a recording studio and he uses Belden for the most part. Trans Line and Waveguides, Electromagnetic theory are both great for understanding point charges in space and in a conductor.
McGlentosh
proud McOwner since 1978
McGlentosh said:
macman007
Mcintosh..Made In USA
Wait a tic...are you telling me that there are things the MX135 does that the "McIntosh " remote doesnt support? I never read much of my manual. I never unboxed my other remote either. What all can this thing do as far as soundfields with just the front main speakers running. I havent gotten into hooking up the multi channel stuff yet
Artie
Artie