What are members' impressions of Transparent Audio cables? Any thoughts?

pke10000 said:

"Cut from the same cloth"... It is very interesting, I agree^^

I've ever compare MB's ref and sig (Ultra was not income to Korea). Ref was normally good. Well balance, wide spectrum, less dynamic. Sig added strong bass and some special high like as sparcle, particle, airy, ...

When I compared Siltech empress and triple crown. Empress shows what the siltech is. Perfect dynamic, gold sand high, less and tight bass. Triple crown added great bass and wide stage.

When I compared Transparent Magnum opus and Nordost valhalla2, magnum shows what the 'perfect' is. Great bass, natural, transparent, staging, perfetct high without any particle.

I hope to put the puzzle of TA. So want to listen TA's ref or xl.
If it is from same cloth, I'll go to TA. It maybe needs a month to audit TA in my home. If it does not meet my expectation, I'll keep MB ref.

Click to expand...

Very interesting. A big fan/owner of Opus...have never heard Opus Magnus.

PeterA said:

Baselio, after some time, came around to blaming the Ayre electronics for the lack of tactile holographic sound from the system. Not the speakers and not the cables. But, as others have pointed out, it could also have been the set up or room, or any number of other reasons. Two different systems in different rooms makes drawing such conclusions difficult at best.

Click to expand...

Hi Peter, please don't put words in my mouth. I haven't "blamed" any single component for the sound I heard. I described the sound and identified possible contributors. I haven't spoken badly about your cables or about anything else for that matter, and I haven't encouraged anyone to draw conclusions. I've provided some data points, stated my preferences, offered a suggestion, but nothing more.

Thanks.

PeterA said:

Agreed. Sparkle or "glittering flashes of light" could easily be caused by high frequency distortion in the context of high end audio.

Click to expand...

This is a real stretch, to be honest. For example, my Accuton ceramic drivers have some of the lowest distortion measurements of any speaker driver in the world. Lower than soft domes, or at least any that I've seen measured. As a result, Accutons deliver incredibly high resolution and transparency. So we could probably posit that distortion products are in part responsible for the often soft and dry sound produced by soft dome tweeters. Certainly some of the dryness results due to breaking up. And further, good amplifiers are also low in high frequency harmonics. Perhaps one of the worst amplifier for high frequency distortion that I've heard is the Hypex NC400 Class D. This amp exhibits distortion (probably non-harmonic) which increases with frequency, and its treble is unmistakably grating. But distortion aside, real life treble can be glaring and at times harsh. The crash of a cymbal isn't supposed to be damped, unless you grab it. Snares are supposed to bite. Etc. Let's not call it distortion, or at the very least, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from casually suggesting that I don't know the difference.

bazelio said:

This is a real stretch, to be honest. For example, my Accuton ceramic drivers have some of the lowest distortion measurements of any speaker driver in the world. Lower than soft domes, or at least any that I've seen measured. As a result, Accutons deliver incredibly high resolution and transparency. So we could probably posit that distortion products are in part responsible for the often soft and dry sound produced by soft dome tweeters. Certainly some of the dryness results due to breaking up. And further, good amplifiers are also low in high frequency harmonics. Perhaps one of the worst amplifier for high frequency distortion that I've heard is the Hypex NC400 Class D. This amp exhibits distortion (probably non-harmonic) which increases with frequency, and its treble is unmistakably grating. But distortion aside, real life treble can be glaring and at times harsh. The crash of a cymbal isn't supposed to be damped, unless you grab it. Snares are supposed to bite. Etc. Let's not call it distortion, or at the very least, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from casually suggesting that I don't know the difference.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, most of the time the sound of Snares and cymbals is nowhere near as glaring as we typically hear in real life. But, IMO, this is mostly due to the fact that the recording chain is to blame. I have actually heard very few pieces that have recorded these two instruments with the bite and what we call 'splash' ( in the pro world) that defines the 'real'. I think the problem lies with the fact that these instruments ( like few others) can very quickly saturate the recording device..and so the engineer turns them down in the mix. Annoying, because we then do not get the impact that the piece and the artist was intending. I strongly suspect that most speakers out there can actually deliver the goods with regards to the sound of these instruments...assuming it is well recorded in the first place. ( A rarity, IME).

DaveyF said:

I agree with you, most of the time the sound of Snares and cymbals is nowhere near as glaring as we typically hear in real life. But, IMO, this is mostly due to the fact that the recording chain is to blame. I have actually heard very few pieces that have recorded these two instruments with the bite and what we call 'splash' ( in the pro world) that defines the 'real'. I think the problem lies with the fact that these instruments ( like few others) can very quickly saturate the recording device..and so the engineer turns them down in the mix. Annoying, because we then do not get the impact that the piece and the artist was intending. I strongly suspect that most speakers out there can actually deliver the goods with regards to the sound of these instruments...assuming it is well recorded in the first place. ( A rarity, IME).

Click to expand...

Yeah. We fundamentally know what cymbals sound like if we've ever played or been around drum kits with a lot of cymbals, or heard the isolated percussion section of an orchestra. Even at orchestras, though, the venue can kill the high end. And as you suggest, probably all recorded music is 'fake' as it actually has to be in order to seem realistic in the end! It's a paradox. My friend sent me a high quality bootleg of an old 80's metal concert and it had cymbal crashes that were unadulterated but either saturating the tape or clipping the mic pre. So what you're saying makes sense to me. Now I wonder what folks who think that treble glare is distortion would say after hearing the Kronos Quartet up close and personal. Violins can get loud and at times harsh in close proximity to the listener. Certainly within the range of 3m - 4m in our typical listening rooms.

andromedaaudio said:

That's why i always stated dont dismiss the focal titanium dome because its older ,
Its always give and take with speaker design .
Im with bazelio

Click to expand...

I wouldn't dismiss the older titanium dome tweeter either, but I haven't heard it. Metal tweeters can be good (but can also be bad). The Von Schweikert Beryllium tweeters I heard in VR-55s were not bad at all. I've heard other honky-colored Beryllium tweeters that were unlistenable. So it's a mixed bag, in my experience. And I do think that a well executed metal dome tweeter would have improved the sound of the Wilson Yvettes I heard, not hindered it.

bazelio said:

Hi Peter, please don't put words in my mouth. I haven't "blamed" any single component for the sound I heard. I described the sound and identified possible contributors. I haven't spoken badly about your cables or about anything else for that matter, and I haven't encouraged anyone to draw conclusions. I've provided some data points, stated my preferences, offered a suggestion, but nothing more.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

bazelio said:

No Peter. I haven't said I attribute flat sound to Transparent cables. I have tried to share what I've heard from MB cables in two completely different systems that was easy to pick out; namely a tactile palpability. And while I don't attribute the deficiencies of the Wilson system to Transparent cables, I do have justifiable doubts that they perform at the level of MB cables. The flatness was extreme - a wall of sound. Most likely it was primarily that the Ayre electronics are simply flat and dead. But on the other hand, having heard the performance capabilities of MB Ultras, I'd be surprised if they didn't improve that system. I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

Bazelio, Perhaps "blame" was too strong a word. Based on your very own statement above, perhaps "suggests" might be more appropriate. "Most likely it was primarily that the Ayre electronics are simply flat and dead." To me, this reads as though you are singling out one component in that system which you think might be responsible for the flat and dead sound. I apologize if I am misinterpreting your words.

Regarding the term "sparkle": I have heard systems which do exhibit an attribute that others have described to me as "sparkle". They and I while listening to these systems hear a bright shimmering sound at certain frequencies. I happen to think in some cases, this sound, which can be a heightened emphasis on high frequencies may actually be a form of distortion or artifacts, somewhere in the chain caused by materials, the room, or any number of other factors. It could even be the mastering of the recording. Whether this sound contributes to the listener thinking the system sounds more real or less real reproducing things like cymbals is a subjective question which can not be answered here in a discussion forum. I am only suggesting that if a system exhibits "sparkle", it may be a form of distortion. Perhaps we simply disagree about this.

I have been setting up and learning about my new Magico Q3 speakers. For a long time I have read that many people find the Magico Q series to have a hard, sterile, and analytical sound, with aggressive, even distorted highs. I do not hear any of that in my system right now. I can change the overall character of the sound pretty dramatically with simple changes in speaker position. Right now, the Q3s are sounding pretty resolving, transparent to the recording, and natural. High frequencies, and cymbals, have never sounded more convincing. Perhaps I can't hear the tweeter's distortion, or it is not as distorted or aggressive as others have often claimed, or my electronics or Transparent Audio cables are attenuating or rolling off those high frequencies. I really don't know.

PeterA said:

I have been setting up and learning about my new Magico Q3 speakers. For a long time I have read that many people find the Magico Q series to have a hard, sterile, and analytical sound, with aggressive, even distorted highs. I do not hear any of that in my system right now.

Click to expand...

I'd say these folks are hearing upstream problems, not problems with the Q series, which I think are stupendous speakers when driven correctly.

PeterA said:

Bazelio, Perhaps "blame" was too strong a word. Based on your very own statement above, perhaps "suggests" might be more appropriate. "Most likely it was primarily that the Ayre electronics are simply flat and dead." To me, this reads as though you are singling out one component in that system which you think might be responsible for the flat and dead sound. I apologize if I am misinterpreting your words.

Click to expand...

The combination of the Class AB Ayre and the soft dome tweeters - I suspect - is most of it. I've talked about both in separate posts. The amp probably causes the wall of sound (IMO) and both soft domes and amp are probably responsible for softness and lack of splash/shimmer/sparkle/pick-your-term. If you're able to play the audio from the youtube video I posted - knowing that it's compressed and an imperfect illustration - through your DAC, you can get a reasonable idea of the sound signature. This system used VTL instead of Ayre, but is still very reminiscent of the sound I heard. I mentioned this as well.

Regarding the term "sparkle": I have heard systems which do exhibit an attribute that others have described to me as "sparkle". They and I while listening to these systems hear a bright shimmering sound at certain frequencies. I happen to think in some cases, this sound, which can be a heightened emphasis on high frequencies may actually be a form of distortion or artifacts, somewhere in the chain caused by materials, the room, or any number of other factors. It could even be the mastering of the recording. Whether this sound contributes to the listener thinking the system sounds more real or less real reproducing things like cymbals is a subjective question which can not be answered here in a discussion forum. I am only suggesting that if a system exhibits "sparkle", it may be a form of distortion. Perhaps we simply disagree about this.

I have been setting up and learning about my new Magico Q3 speakers. For a long time I have read that many people find the Magico Q series to have a hard, sterile, and analytical sound, with aggressive, even distorted highs. I do not hear any of that in my system right now. I can change the overall character of the sound pretty dramatically with simple changes in speaker position. Right now, the Q3s are sounding pretty resolving, transparent to the recording, and natural. High frequencies, and cymbals, have never sounded more convincing. Perhaps I can't hear the tweeter's distortion, or it is not as distorted or aggressive as others have often claimed, or my electronics or Transparent Audio cables are attenuating or rolling off those high frequencies. I really don't know.

Click to expand...

You may have found something with .5 amps and the Magicos that just perfectly suits your preferences. I just received a demo XA30.8 from Reno Hifi, and it's breaking in for a few days. Looking forward to trying this out! I don't need the power provided by the larger mono blocks.