Transparent MM2

i have just completed an audition of the ultra MM2 IC in my system [baseline cables: all ref mm1 SC and ics, latest xl pc's] . an a/b/c/d comparison in the source to preamp position against the following TA mm1 ICs: ultra, ref, and refXL. i will post an extensive review in the review section of this site by next week. the audition process was as thorough as my previous review of 2 preamps: vtl 6.5 vs arc ref 3 on this site [posted in 07] . cheers.

khrys: unfortunately, i was unable to get my hands on a high end TA IC with mm2 to audition (such as TA ref+mm2, ref XL +mm2) . my review is based upon comparing the new mm2 technology on an ultra IC in an a/b/c/d of ic's with orig mm tech of ultra, ref, and ref xl (which you have) . i hope it will be enlightening nonetheless. that said, in about 2 weeks i should be able to review thouroughly TA ref mm2 against the ref XL (orig mm) and possibly the TA refMM (orig tech) if i dare borrow one from my wonderful dealer.

why, you may ask, do i need to wait about 2 weeks to audition the ref mm2? because that is about the time my ref cables will be back from TA with the mm2. did i just let the cat out of the bag? the mm2 tech pushed most all aspects of the ultra's sound presentation above the ref level. the mm2 tech moved the ultra into the sound presentaiton of the ref XL, where it has never been. (btw, IMO the ref+mm orig was never in the sound world of the ref XL+mm orig in terms of nuance, timbral detail, micro dynamics, transient clarity etc. in most respects, the ref has been the big brother of the ultra, not the little brother of the ref xl.) with the mm2 tech, in most aspects, the ultra mm2 sounds as if is the ref XL's (orig mm) little brother, so to speak. now dont jump on me. there are a few aspects of the ultra mm2 that did not leap upward to the next level... stay tuned for the details.

during my audition, i have attempted to evaluate several aspects of sound presentation (across a diverse range of classical music ) whose sole purpose ultimately is to reveal the performers' most personal communication of their musical experience while bringing a score to life.... interpretation. of course, audiogoners want concrete details, so i specifically noted comparisons of the physical aspects of sound presentation (transient speed, decay, timbral nuance, mirco dynamics) which musicians discuss in terms of articulation, release, tone color, intensity, dynamic modulations.. all at the service of phrasing etc. . LOL

IF ref+mm(orig) and refXL+mm(orig) enjoy a similar or nearly similar metamorphosis with the MM2 tech in most aspecs for which we listen as a complete musical experience, ,well, that will be most outstanding! this is something i cannot comment upon at this time as i have no ref XL+mm2 to audition. i would conject (always dangerous) that the higher up you go in terms of cable quality, the less substantial the improvements may be realized. cheers, marc

no_money : the ultraMM2 is a significant improvement above the ultra mm1 in many areas. i do not think you have to jump to TA ref to achieve significant improvement. i think you will hear a nice quality change even if you start by upgrading only the cdp/preamp IC to the mm2 tech. perhaps the nearby dealer has an ultra mm2 you can borrow for a day or 2 to audition? this is always the best way to finalize a decision... in your own system with your own ears.

hi no money : the easiest solution : - borrow from your dealer both the bal ultra mm2 and the se ultra mm2 (the MF doesnt have a xlr option? many components that do often perform much better in bal mode, but it really depends on how the cdp was designed. this is all beyond my tech knowledge, i always decide by listening) .

i think the commonly accepted rule is that the IC from the source should be the highest quality cable, then the SC, lastly the pre to amp in terms of impact on the quality of the presentation IF you upgrade in phases. sometimes SC may impact more than the source IC, but this all depends on the system as a whole, synergy issues, and of course which components + PCs are the weakest or strongest link in the system.also, many have concluded that well matched component specific PCs have an equal if not greater part to play than ICs. audition widely and intelligently over several days or longer. never go on a 2 day impression. // i think the upgrade of the ultra mm to mm2 is not inexpensive, but still less than the cost of a ref mm1 and the ultra+mm2 excedes the ref mm1 in many important areas. i think it all depends on the capability of your system to benefit from the higher level of presentation.

i have to toss in the proverbial monkey wrench. for future consideration, you may want to consider changing your cdp to, for example, an used ayre c5se. the cost is more than the a single IC upgrade but may net you much more in terms of overall presentation with your present cables. it may be worth waiting for the $ for this type of system upgrade. although there will be a jump of clarity with the mm2, the details of the music will still be limited to what the MF cdp can read and present. the ayre c5se is in another league and will surely offer more of what is recorded on the cd... and with much more musical engagement IMO.

i love the w/p8s and happy to learn that with each carefully chosen upgrade, they present more of the "live/tactile" experience with greater nuance, overall transparency, and dynamicism.

when all the componets were set, which is less than a year now, my starter cables were all TA ultra mm1. after about 3 months of acclimating to the new system and run in, i noticed a small crossover issue and a tendency to have an mildly bright top end with some performers who i know to have a somewhat aggresssively lean upper end live (sandor vegh of the vegh quartet, some london and russian symphony orchestras, many soprano divas who choose to sing arias a bit beyond their top end comfort zone.) However, with recent cable upgrade auditions, that has largely disappeared. i still have some PCs to incorporate after the new TA ref mm2 cables arrive and are run in. with the small experience i have gathered from PC auditioning, the tweeter issue, minor now, should disappear. and there are tube rolling possibilities in my vtl preamp to explore. overall, i view speakers less independently, more as part of the whole system to work cohesively. suprisingly, the crossover issue was less pronounced with higher model cables, though i dont understand why.

i have heard the w/p8s with an all arc system too, but not with TA opus, which in the system you describe is really overkill. no doubt the system would be highly dynamic, though a bit sluggish and spread at the bottom. the ref110 is not the strongest choice for w/p8s. better for the superb sophia2's or much more sensitive speakers on the whole. thanks for your dialog. cheers.

see the transparent audio web site. i think there is a dealer locator or you can email them.

i have posted a review on this site of the MM2 tech on an audition of a pair of Ultra mm2 ICs btwn my cdp and preamp. in the audtion process, i compare the Ultra mm2 against 3 other mm1 transparent audio cables: Ultra, Ref, Ref XL (mm1 tech, not xl tech).

for those of us with relatively more "modest" budgets than those above who are fortunate enough to live with TA opus and similar top notch cables, the upgrade to the mm2 in the mid-range models such as ultra and reference is an outstanding upgrade. i have now lived with my ref mm2 SC and IC for beyond the 200 initial break in period. IMO the mm2 offers great value in the quality of presentation within each price range. I have not auditioned every SC and IC out there, but of those i have heard in my system, the mm2 tech cables brings a level of performance that is significantly above the competition in many areas at the origninal mm tech pricerange. caveate: system synergy is always a major consideration. cheers.