Upgrade from Outlaw 975?!

[lovinthehd]

Nice!
So all I had to do was mention "cables" and "MIT" to get some attention around here?! lol!

This wasn't a high end cable at all. These ware actually probably the cheapest MIT branded ICs you can buy, model "EXPII", I think around $50/pair from some ebay retailer.

I ended up with them as I was really unhappy with the Monoprice 12g/AudioQuest Sidewinder ICs combo I had. If I told you the LSi9 was capable of sound "harsh/edgy" and you'd heard that speaker before elsewhere, you'd tell me I was nuts... but with those cables, that's what I got. So then I picked up a used set of unknown used ICs to try for $35 from a fellow on the Polk Forum, as the seller indicated these cables had a laid back presentation, so that sounded like a good solution. Well, while the dgyness/harshness was surely gone, those seemed to push the sound stage way to the back, behind the speaker and just made the whole thing sound very sleepy. I wasn't happy. However, the key finding from this test was: Cables, the ICs in this example, made a difference! I then called up AudioAdvisor and asked for a rec. They advised I replace the monoprice/sidewinder combo with an AudioQuest Type-4/ Blue II ICs something or other... $240 later... sound was a LOT closer to what I thought I should hear, but still even this sounded kind of thin... tin-can thin... BAH! Then I decided to do my own homework, did a sh*t load of research and came across these MIT EXPII ICs. I kid you not, I plugged them in and with no adjustments at all the sound was "normal". All thinning/edginess side effects were gone, but presentation also not recessed like with the unknown used set of IC cables.

Anyway, while I'm no expert, I've played in the sandbox for about a decade now. If you guys are out to convince me cables make no audible difference... please save your time for more productive conversations... I do appreciate your input though.

No, I'd just say your determinations by cable are full of poop. Audiophoolery....like Polk forums. Audioquest is just criminal in their bullshit.

 

[lietuvis91]

lietuvis91
I don't know what kind of equipment you keep buying that has you saying "oh s-h-i-t, i just blew more money" time after time and "Right off the bat I haven't like any new piece I've added". If that was me, I'd be looking pretty hard at my evaluation and decision criteria. I might join an audio forum for some advice.

I came to Audioholics to learn more about my audio hobby. I don't claim to be an expert on anything, much less an expert on audio systems. I come here on a regular basis to get a more fact based education on my sonic solutions. I come here so when I spend my hard earned money, like I will be this week, I will be delighted with my purchase, not dismayed.

I look forward to my new speakers. That's expectation bias. I read reviews and articles about them. That adds in reviewer bias. I went and auditioned the speakers in the home of someone who owns them: that adds in confirmation bias. Each of these layers of bias is unavoidable and could lead to catastrophe if it weren't for the science and measurement that backs each layer of opinion up. That's where the strength of AH comes in. They got the goods on actual, measured performance.

On the subject of perfect, I will leave that til the next life.

I've been approaching this hobby just the way you describe, and would have to agree with everything you say. The only thing missing in your outline of the process is, after all this research and evaluation, buying the hardware and placing it in YOUR environment. 9 times out of 10 that's the fly in the ointment, as the same exact setup will sound very different depending on surroundings, furniture, room size, number and size of windows, type of floor, etc. So all of the far removed evaluation is great and helpful, but the rubber meats the road when you bring it home and try to make it work. This is where things can get hairy...

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

lietuvis91
OK, I thought I could rest in peace and not touch the MIT cables thing. Dang, I really, really wish I could.
I know I have the right to remain silent, it seems I just don't have the ability.

I come to AH for the education and to learn stuff. Cables are part of that education. I have been in IT and in a technical field my whole life so technical mumbo jumbo is a language I speak pretty well. I also have a very well developed B.S. detector.

MIT Cables? May I share a few tibits from the MIT cables website? I won't change a word, I promise.

"MIT Cables' core audio cable technology is our exclusive Poles of Articulation, named after the fact that every audio cable has a single point where it is most efficient at storing and transporting energy. At this point in the audio frequency spectrum, the cable will articulate best, and represents the cables' particular Articulation Pole."

I could stop right there and we could have a lecture on each clause and phrase. I am going to press forward however, because it there are other items we probably need to see regarding MIT cables.

"Thank you for your purchase of MIT interface products. In order to achieve their full sonic potential, all MIT interfaces must be properly installed and burned in for the required length of time. Remember this simple 2/2 Rule: 75% of performance in two days — 100% in two weeks! The arrows on the cable indicate the direction of signal flow — the network box closest to the destination. (Reversing the direction will affect the sonic performance of the system!)"

Yes, although I am ignorant of the how or why, MIT cables require burn in, are directional AND come in a left and right channel. Wait ! Wait ! There's more

"After the initial two days of break in, the treble frequencies (above about 1 KHz) will begin to assume a more natural tonal balance and bass frequencies will have more authority.

• As more time passes, the soundstage will begin to open. There will be more space between instruments and dynamics will be improved.
• After the two-week period is over, the signature MIT image will appear, revealing microdynamics and subtle time-related cues, such as instrument voicing, recording-venue acoustics, and spatial effects. These developments can be dramatic — so please be patient!"

I was unaware that cables put more space between instruments on a soundstage and improve the dynamic range of a recording. And if we keep up, we get more recording venue acoustics and spacial effects. Dramatic effects. Just be patient.

You will notice that I, the relative newb, didn't make any statements about the MIT cables themselves. These are all quotes by the manufacturer. As a relative newb, I am not qualified to judge cables of this caliber. I leave that up to the manufacturer, and other folks who know better than me.

Wow. There has to be something prosecutable in there. I can't believe these statements exist in the world. Buck, if you gotta be an expert to preach crap like that, ill just stay a dumb news for another few decades.
OP, glad you like em. That's all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lietuvis91]

lietuvis91
OK, I thought I could rest in peace and not touch the MIT cables thing. Dang, I really, really wish I could.
I know I have the right to remain silent, it seems I just don't have the ability.

I come to AH for the education and to learn stuff. Cables are part of that education. I have been in IT and in a technical field my whole life so technical mumbo jumbo is a language I speak pretty well. I also have a very well developed B.S. detector.

MIT Cables? May I share a few tibits from the MIT cables website? I won't change a word, I promise.

"MIT Cables' core audio cable technology is our exclusive Poles of Articulation, named after the fact that every audio cable has a single point where it is most efficient at storing and transporting energy. At this point in the audio frequency spectrum, the cable will articulate best, and represents the cables' particular Articulation Pole."

I could stop right there and we could have a lecture on each clause and phrase. I am going to press forward however, because it there are other items we probably need to see regarding MIT cables.

"Thank you for your purchase of MIT interface products. In order to achieve their full sonic potential, all MIT interfaces must be properly installed and burned in for the required length of time. Remember this simple 2/2 Rule: 75% of performance in two days — 100% in two weeks! The arrows on the cable indicate the direction of signal flow — the network box closest to the destination. (Reversing the direction will affect the sonic performance of the system!)"

Yes, although I am ignorant of the how or why, MIT cables require burn in, are directional AND come in a left and right channel. Wait ! Wait ! There's more

"After the initial two days of break in, the treble frequencies (above about 1 KHz) will begin to assume a more natural tonal balance and bass frequencies will have more authority.

• As more time passes, the soundstage will begin to open. There will be more space between instruments and dynamics will be improved.
• After the two-week period is over, the signature MIT image will appear, revealing microdynamics and subtle time-related cues, such as instrument voicing, recording-venue acoustics, and spatial effects. These developments can be dramatic — so please be patient!"

I was unaware that cables put more space between instruments on a soundstage and improve the dynamic range of a recording. And if we keep up, we get more recording venue acoustics and spacial effects. Dramatic effects. Just be patient.

You will notice that I, the relative newb, didn't make any statements about the MIT cables themselves. These are all quotes by the manufacturer. As a relative newb, I am not qualified to judge cables of this caliber. I leave that up to the manufacturer, and other folks who know better than me.

I apologize, I'm not 100% sure precisely what point you were trying to push across. Just about all higher end cable manufacturers have a brake in disclosure and build wires out of copper, silver, some combination of the two or whatever else they think produces the best sound. Many claim to utilize some special process to "improve performance". My point is, if you were to read most of the other high end cable manufacturer notes, you'd likely find a lot of the same kind of stuff/fluff.

In the end, it is the users who will compare the cables against each other and pick out the ones that truly add value and work best with the types of speakers and amps that they have. As you probably know, the sound you hear is not just a consequence of speaker design, but is a consequence of where the signal begins and where it ends. Components in the entire chain can color the sound and have an impact.

I will tell you that even in the very early days of my personal experience, I distinctly noticed when my 12g monoprice cable broke in, the sound stage opened up and the highs smoothed out some, the lows became a bit tigher. This is all before I ever knew that cables needed to brake in. And that system was based on a cheap onkyo receiver and some small polk audio monitor towers.

I am not trying to convince you of anything either, you may think all of what I'm saying is rubbish, and that's completely fine with me. My proof is in the pudding I already ate. ;-)

 

[lovinthehd]

I apologize, I'm not 100% sure precisely what point you were trying to push across. Just about all cable manufacturers have a brake in disclosure and build wires out of copper, silver, some combination of the two or whatever else they think produces the best sound. It is the users them who compare them and pick the ones that work best with the types of speakers and amps that they have. As you probably know, the sound you hear is not just a consequence of speaker design, but is a consequence of where the signal begins and where it ends. The entire chain has an impact.

I will tell you that I noticed when my 12g monoprice cable broke in, before I ever knew that cables needed to brake in. And that system was based on a cheap onkyo receiver and some small polk audio monitor towers.

I am not trying to convince you of anything either, you may think all of what I'm saying is rubbish, and that's completely fine with me. My proof is in the pudding I already ate. ;-)

NO. Just NO! Cable break in are you crazy? Or a wire dealer?

 

[lietuvis91]

No, I'd just say your determinations by cable are full of poop. Audiophoolery....like Polk forums. Audioquest is just criminal in their bullshit.

I think I see where you stand. Sounds like you think AudioQuest and MIT are both full of BS, is that right?

 

[lovinthehd]

I think I see where you stand. Sounds like you think AudioQuest and MIT are both full of BS, is that right?

Not just me, many others that have their heads screwed on right. General forum stance.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I think I see where you stand. Sounds like you think AudioQuest and MIT are both full of BS, is that right?

Yep. AQ is known for lying and doctoring results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lietuvis91]

NO. Just NO! Cable break in are you crazy? Or a wire dealer?

Lol, no, I'm not a cable dealer.

Thinking about it now, the speakers might have been new too at the time I first ran the monoprice cable, so it is possible the improvement in SQ had to do with the new speaker loosening up more than changes in the cable.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

That makes a lot more sense. Cables don't break in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lovinthehd]

Lol, no, I'm not a cable dealer.

Thinking about it now, the speakers might have been new too at the time I first ran the monoprice cable, so it is possible the improvement in SQ had to do with the new speaker loosening up more than changes in the cable.

Sorry to be so brusque but a common fallacy. More likely it was you breaking into the sound of the new gear than it was an audible difference due to mechanical break in of the driver....but absolutely nothing to do with break in of the cable, that's just silly.

 

[lietuvis91]

Not just me, many others that have their heads screwed on right. General forum stance.

But then how do you explain the Audioquest Sidewinder, the Audioquest Blue Thunder (going from memory), and the MIT EXPII all having a different sonic signature?

I know I switched gears to ICs, but ...

You didn't have to tell me the Sidewinder was cheaper. I heard it. It really just sucked! It wasn't until I got to the MIT EXP2 where I got the sound quality to where I thought it should have been in the first place.

 

[lovinthehd]

But then how do you explain the Audioquest Sidewinder, the Audioquest Blue Thunder (going from memory), and the MIT EXPII all having a different sonic signature?

I know I switched gears to ICs, but ...

You didn't have to tell me the Sidewinder was cheaper. I heard it. It really just sucked! It wasn't until I got to the MIT EXP2 where I got the sound quality to where I thought it should have been in the first place.

Because they're all non-starters to begin with. They have nothing to do with adequate interconnects or speaker cables...

Not that they're bad per se, just extremely overpriced and accompanied by much bullshit in what they can do for audio

 

[lovinthehd]

Start for some good common sense perspective here from a former director of McIntosh http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

 

[lietuvis91]

Start for some good common sense perspective here from a former director of McIntosh http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Thanks, I'll take a look. May I ask then what cables do you personally run?

 

[lovinthehd]

Thanks, I'll take a look. May I ask then what cables do you personally run?

No brand name stuff really, maybe some Mediabridge stuff, some Belden stock, usually more generic than anything with my own connectors. I've made my own for the last few years except hdmi or optical. Here's a balanced minidsp 2x4 box with rca/phoenix and xlr/phoenix connectors I put together for example (using Belden coax stock in this case):

 

[Bucknekked]

I've been approaching this hobby just the way you describe, and would have to agree with everything you say. The only thing missing in your outline of the process is, after all this research and evaluation, buying the hardware and placing it in YOUR environment. 9 times out of 10 that's the fly in the ointment, as the same exact setup will sound very different depending on surroundings, furniture, room size, number and size of windows, type of floor, etc. So all of the far removed evaluation is great and helpful, but the rubber meats the road when you bring it home and try to make it work. This is where things can get hairy...

lietuvis91
The environment isn't missing in my approach. Its missing in the brief response I typed about your situation. Its definitely been part of my approach however. I have been involved in several threads to learn (I'm a newb) more about my hobby. One of those threads is room measurement and things I can do to help things sound better. I have learned REW and have taken some time to understand my environment variables. The room you listen in becomes part of the sound system. As you mentioned, it plays a significant role.

Getting a handle on my room, doing some measurements and then getting some opinions on what will make things better has been about a 2 month effort. Its been worth it however just to understand all the relationships and variables. You are correct: there are a lot of things that affect a systems sound other than just the scientific measurements of the equipment. I'm working to understand those too.

 

[Bucknekked]

I apologize, I'm not 100% sure precisely what point you were trying to push across. Just about all higher end cable manufacturers have a brake in disclosure

I will tell you that even in the very early days of my personal experience, I distinctly noticed when my 12g monoprice cable broke in, the sound stage opened up and the highs smoothed out some, the lows became a bit tigher.

lietuvis91
I think if you look at a wide sampling of my posts, I try to be as nice and neutral as possible. If you feel I tried to push a point of view upon you, I apologize for any discomfort that may have caused. I'm just a newb and enjoy the forum.

As to "all cable manufacturers have a burn in or brake in disclosure", I would simply not agree with that. I would not agree on a very basic electrical engineering point of view that cables are anything other than a simple conductor of electricity. A speaker cable or interconnect cable can not be directional for electricity if it is simply a piece of wire. A speaker cable or interconnect cable is not a tone control if it is simply a piece of wire. A simple piece of wire, no matter how exotic, can not alter or improve the aspects of a recording which only occur inside your own head as one listens to music or recorded material.

I am not a preacher of a particular audio gospel. I don't mind if you buy expensive cables and enjoy the experience they bring to you. I have no issue with your enjoyment of any aspect of your audio system. If the cables bring you real listening enjoyment : its money well spent. Go forth and conquer.

When audio principals get discussed and put on the table, I can comment on the value of information presented. If the information is solid: its gets a two thumbs up. If the information is suspect, it will probably get some examination and discussion. Its one of the valuable parts of AH : the discussion.
I do enjoy a good discussion.

 

[Bucknekked]

Start for some good common sense perspective here from a former director of McIntosh http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

lovinthehd:
I don't know if the OP will take the time to read the "speaker wire" article by Roger Russel of McIntosh. I spent about 30 minutes reading it over and it was well worth the time. It isn't so much what Roger said about cables that made it interesting, it was all the other stuff that doesn't get discussed. I think the article should be on speed dial for future discussions involving magic qualities.

The sad part is, there will be plenty of future discussions about the magical qualities of cables and other devices. Sadder still, many of the folks who will post about them are unwilling or unable to learn something more objective about their hobby. Keep that article at the ready. I suspect it may see some future use.

 

[lovinthehd]

lovinthehd:
I don't know if the OP will take the time to read the "speaker wire" article by Roger Russel of McIntosh. I spent about 30 minutes reading it over and it was well worth the time. It isn't so much what Roger said about cables that made it interesting, it was all the other stuff that doesn't get discussed. I think the article should be on speed dial for future discussions involving magic qualities.

The sad part is, there will be plenty of future discussions about the magical qualities of cables and other devices. Sadder still, many of the folks who will post about them are unwilling or unable to learn something more objective about their hobby. Keep that article at the ready. I suspect it may see some future use.

Yeah I throw that at the newbs all the time. Don't even need to save the site, know it by heart