New Spectral/MIT cables

FredTam said:

I am planning to upgrade my pre-amp from Hovland HP-100 to Spectral DMC30SS - S2 in a few month, waiting for my year end bonus for the time being ! Eventually I will get the Spectral DMA-260 as well to push my Wilson Audio Sophia 3. Don't think I can spend too much on interconnect and speaker cables. Inquired my local dealer and they are still selling and suggesting the old MIT/Spectral cable like 330 and 750 or something like that. I just need something below 10K for both interconnect and speaker cables and not to worry about upgrading that in the near future and spend more time and money on music. Any suggestions ? I never used MIT cables before so I have no clue. Thanks.

Click to expand...

pete said:

The old 330s are junk. You want 350 reference i/c's minimum, preferably 350 EVO.
Without quality ic's you can not hear Spectral quality.
The 750 series 2 speaker cable is barely adequate, go to the 770 series 2.
They are cheap used. Audiogon. Be patient, they come up.

Click to expand...

FredTam said:

Thanks for your advice Pete.
I am actually planning to get the DMC-30SS in March when I will be back from my business trip in Asia. If possible, will use Crystal Standard IC I am using with Modwright KWA-100SE until I have enough money to get the DMA-260 together with Spectral / MIT IC and speaker cables. I was told by my dealer there will be new cable announcement soon from Spectral. I guess I should wait then, don't you agree or if there is any MIT IC I should try but not want to spend more than 5K for that. Thank you.

Click to expand...

pete said:

I suggest it is not necessary to wait for Spectral. MIT has excellent cables on the used market that will provide better sound for your money.
I suggest you go to Audiogon website and search under MIT. You will find ads by Joe Abrams. He is a licensed seller for MIT and is probably the most knowledgeable person you can talk to. Tell him a happy customer Pete from British Columbia Canada referred you. You can buy from him with absolute confidence.
I remain open for questions. Best regards.

Click to expand...

audiosessions said:

The New Spectral Cables are on the Website now.
UL-38 HD Ultra III SPK
UL-230 Ultra III INT

Reference Series

UL-60 HD Ultra III SPK
UL-350 Ultra III INT

Click to expand...

Adimon said:

Prices??

Click to expand...

lydon said:

I keep reading about on this forum with regard to Spectral products seem to be under the control of the artistry that exist in the house of MIT.

The MAX-rev 1 I.C. and those $25-40k SHD speaker cables, how can Spectral with a straight face recommend the above when the ticket to this show can only truly be experienced by those who have means to lay down a considerable amount of money for the chance just to listen to whats possible within their own rigs. I remember mullard88 saying something to the effect of: "if you can't afford to buy it, then don't listen". But is this new offering of cables really the answer for those who can't afford to step up into the stratosphere? One other thing, I don't actually have any idea what Spectral's people really use to evaluate the effectiveness of their own designs, but it seems to me with the resources they can bring to bear on such a subject, I just can't believe that the old UL350's II and UL770's II were their choice to make critical listening decisions and all of this with the first wave of DMA-400's making their way to there new owners. Spectral's operation is just way too maticulous for such a lackadaisical recommendation. What do you guys think?

Click to expand...

ack said:

First of all, I didn't see them recommending the top-tier SHD cables - where did you see that? Even if they did, price is not a concern when it comes to performance recommendations; dealing with MIT's offensive pricing is up to the potential buyer to negotiate (it has been posted here before that the street price of MIT products is 50% off retail for new cables). Second, I and others feel MIT has been able to provide a better interface, and that unlocks the electronics' potential, which is apparently really high; others may not hear the same benefits with their electronics. Third, the question re: the older cables is valid, but performance improves all around by the day, and I doubt they only used those cables for evaluation; in fact, rumor has it they only existed for non-MIT dealers to be able to sell the requisite cables with Spectral gear, plus I assume they had to recommend something at a sensible price point. So there are a number of parameters to consider. Recommendations aside, one should really take a listen up and down the MIT line to find what they deem is a good match.

Having said that, I might as well throw this out there too... another user here on the forum emailed me that one of his friends evaluating the Matrix 90.1 thinks this "HD" setting is playing games with phase. That sent him and me spinning - I had not yet A/B'd between SD and HD with my 90.1's, so this was a good incentive. While he likes either setting depending on the material, I outright find HD problematic and have permanently switched to SD. There are a couple of reasons that made me do it:

1. First of all, my midrange was always a bit glassy since I bought the cables and I was about to actually replace my panels, thinking they are going after 10+ years - but the glassiness is gone in SD. The glassiness depends on the material, but was very evident with soprano and especially tenor vocal. One might argue the cables actually excited regions in the panels, but why now, after the new cables came in.
2. Second, I played electronic music, and since I am able to sit behind the panel and rapidly change the switch, I could easily hear what HD does, and it sounds phasey to me.
3. Third, on another thread some time ago discussing the MIT patents, my impression of them and their white papers is that the so-called "articulation poles" attempt to fix inherent voltage/current phase relationships, which are known to be exactly right (-90 degrees) at exactly one frequency (this is physics). But as you put a "pole" to fix some frequency that inevitably affects others, says me; you then put another "pole" but that affects the first "pole" as well, so you modify both; and so on, until you have a balanced and optimized circuit. Consequently, when HD kicks in with allegedly more (F.A.T.) "poles", as MIT claims, they would end up affecting the other, SD, "poles", unless one believes there are two separate optimized circuits in the boxes, and I seriously doubt that; but possible.
4. I had noticed in numerous dealer auditions that they play their MIT cables - anything from the lower end to the very top - at "SD" all the time; and they are very astute listeners.
5. I just don't buy that F.A.T. articulation thing... they claim inter-octave optimization, and I have no idea what that really means. If they are referring to the 12 semitones in an octave, well, for every instrument's octave(s) and semitones there are harmonics (and fundamentals) in there from other instruments. So totally confused about their claims.
6. There has to be a point that an optimized network is too complex to continue or the compromises too big, cez me.

Feel free to poke holes anywhere... My point is that you one should be careful with MIT cable selection, that's all. I've been dead wrong before, as can be proven by my penchant for continuously expertly picking the wrong lottery numbers...

Click to expand...