I have Anticable interconnects and they are fine. When I first installed it, it did hum a bit, but all I had to do was move it away from the other cables a bit and all was well. They are so inexpensive, it's worth taking the chance anyway!! They also sound very good, but they take a long time to break-in.
When I was looking for a meter of balanced Anti-Cable for my Superscoutmaster rim drive to my preamp, I wondered about any hum problem. Paul made me a double shielded version. When I compared that to a regular meter, I found that they are very, very similar, the double shielded pair being ever so slightly more closed in. I use the regular Anti-cables in that position with absolutely no hum or noise at all.
I would recommand Morrow audio ma3 or ma4...also I would prefer Eichmann Silver Bullet instead of regular rca..
It really bring out the best from my system..
Thanks for the responses guys- I do plan on upgrading to the Eichman plugs if I go with the Anti-Cable ic's.
btw has anyone heard the silver wire version of this ic? I was thinking of trying it but am afraid it might to bright with my system ( never owned any silver speaker wire or ic).
Try PNF Audio. Best cables I've ever used, period. They work incredibly well with PNF's own Symphony speaker cables, but I'd imagine they'll do well with the Anti-Cables, too (although I've never tried the combination personally).
The Anti-Cable ICs hard to beat in pure passage of the music signal. I run them long with no interference and run my SCs very short. These happen to be very thin flat ribbons.
I've had Signal Cables' copper interconnects (forget the nomenclature) here on trade and listened to them for a few weeks.
They are a very high value product as are anti cables. For folks on a budget, it's a no brainer. In a highly resolving system, you'll find them lacking in detail and body. They are similar to anti cables in that regard.
I have no financial affiliation with Signal.
how about AmorphiX iC's? Are you willing to give them a shot? Are they better than any other iC's availale for the audiophile market? You tell me. I design them for myself and have been doing it for 3 years now. Im not going to bore everyone here and hijack your thread by explaining how they are made and so on. If you want to audition... just email me and we can discuss further. No money exchanged. This is, and will always be a labor of love for myself and my hobby. Cheers.
Audiofeil, there just may be no more resolving speaker than the Apogee Scintilla. While some other components in my system have been switched out, including the Speltz SC, the Speltz IC stays.
dog- the PNF Icon looks interesting to me. Do you have any personal experiance with this ic? I'd be curious if anyone has directly compared PNF to Anti-Cable hmm
btw I listen to a lot of rock/alternative music if this helps in my selection of ic's.
I have had Anti-Cables and they are a bargain for sure but they are not in the same league as the Morrow SP3, SP4, or MA3 IC's IMO. I thought Reality Cables were also a step above the anti cable.
Dave, I've used both the Precision A and ICON ic's and both are fantastic performers at the price. The ICON's are definitely worth the difference in price, but the Precision A is really close. I don't want to sound too much like a commercial, but I just can't help it! I've been jumping up & down about PNF ever since I first tried them because they literally trounced everything else I've tried (including my own stuff; and keep in mind that I have a technical background and have even built some designs that are very much like the Anti-Cable ic's...). I have zero affiliation with the company, although I've gotten to know Steve Jain there a bit just through conversation about his product. All I can say is, give 'em a try!
Apologies for taking this thread away from the original questions about the Anti-Cables....
Resolving is a subjective term muralboy and is interpreted differently by all listeners so your claim is simply bogus.
I've owned 2 pairs of Apogees, Caliper and Duetta Signatures. I'm familar with the strengths and weaknesses of ribbons. They are not for everybody.
However, if the anticables work well with your playskool electronics, I'm happy for you.
Audiofeil, you have a deep phobia against all audio that is direct sell, or DIY. I encourage you to get psychological help.
For the sake of other readers. here is some information beyond the capabilities of your challenged mind:
Resolving is not subjective. Resolution is measurable.
The Caliper, and Duetta are second cousins the the Scintilla and Full Range. The former have a single Kapton backed ribbon. The latter have separate midrange and tweeter ribbons. They are naked ribbons, making them a lot lighter, and sensitive. The tweeter ribbons on a Scintilla wraps from front to back, creating a bipole radiation pattern.
Speltz's Anti-Cable interconnects are a true giant killer. Why anyone would want to spend more than their miniscule price, I don't know.
I use to have the AC speaker cables in service too. When I heard Sunyata Helical SCs, I knew there was more. That was depressing, because the Shunyata cables are very expensive. Imagine my happy surprise when I found out ultra thin bare ribbon SCs are even better than the Shunyata SCs.
Buy the Anti-Cable ICs. They are cheap and you have little to loose, if you become convinced something is better in your system. In my system, they have proved the equivalent to any component improvement.
Resolution is measurable.
How is this accomplished?
Tvad...I'm shocked you do not know the answer to this simple question. Let me help...your average size toilet has an opening big enough for someones head to fit in comfortably (dont ask.) BUTT...and thats a big but...if you can manage to pass all the way through to your neck, then anything you hear beyond that point means that the resolution is at the extremes. ESPECIALLY if you flush at the same time. I have this "friend" who did this you see.
Cheers, and best flushings to you.
Reality cables do a nice job for not much money. There is a 20 day trial period for standard lengths that makes this pretty low risk. I sold mine when i moved to ridge street, which are better but much more. good luck
Flushing works best with an H2O amp.
Eldartford and Tvad, you two are very frequent posters and usually impart sound advice. In my case, you are just making fools of yourselves out of ignorance. Anyone who has heard my system would agree with my harsh summation. What I wonder is, who are you two? You are careful not to stick your neck out to acerbic criticisms, like you just handed out to me, by not advertising your own systems. Are you dealers?
Muralman1..I am not a dealer, as my family likes to eat :-). As I have described before I am a retired aerospace engineer who has had an interest in audio equipment since about 1954.
Perhaps you don't remember the "acerbic criticisms" I have taken from Albert and the vinyl police when I described what I see as the shortcomings of LP technology.
I am sure your system sounds great. How could it be otherwise with those speakers. Your enthusiasm for the H2O is, however, over the top, and has become an object of ridicule. Take my advice and lower the volume.
Eldartford, (Ed;) I do take your constructive criticism, should I say, "Did?" and now only will I come in in defense of a product I know full well.
Aerospace is a very hard occupation to ride through to retirement. How did you do it?
Muralman1...Since I retired the company (General Dynamics) has hired me back two times for about a year each time, as a part time consultant. This is a real good way to ease in to retirement. It keeps you in touch with the technology while still giving you freedom to do other things. Of course, the consultant pay, on top of pension and social security is sweet also.
What's a pension?????
I'm probably going to have to delay retirement for 5 years til my 301K recovers! And I'm doing better than my wife, whose 401K became a 201K
Thanks everyone! I decided to try the PNF interconnects and will report my finding when they arrive. I appreciate everyones advice and input.
Hi Tvad. I said that because people who know say so. I am not a techy. Aren't voices and instruments recorded using spectrum analyzers? Some folks have been pushing me to prove my sound through recording analyzers. That is an expensive proposition. The proof is in the pudding, of course.
Resolving is not subjective. Resolution is measurable.
Muralman1, I only asked how measuring resolution is accomplished.
There was no criticism. Just a question.
Resolving is not measurable because it is not even definable.
Every person has a different concept of "resolving".
However, if muralman wants to pursue this I would ask the following:
1. If resolution can be measured, please list the appropriate units and parmameters in the quantification.
2. What tools, instruments, meters, apparatus, etc. are used in the measurement.
Thanks in advance.
Resolving is not measurable because it is not even definable. Every person has a different concept of "resolving".
True. And my suspicion is that Muralman is, intentionally or not, referring to "resolution" in a technical sense, while most audiophiles tend to use it in a musical sense.
For instance, redbook cd is capable of a "resolution" of 16 bits, or 1 part in 65,536 relative to full scale. And in theory a little better than that, if dither is properly applied, noise is weighted by frequency, etc. All of that can certainly be measured.
But as we all know, essentially all that those measurements will reveal about a component are gross design errors, or defects in individual examples of the component. They will tell us essentially nothing about how much musical detail the component is capable of revealing, partly because the ear has better "resolution" (in the musical sense) than most or all instrumentation, and partly because the science involved in correlating measurements with perceived sound quality is still not very well developed.
So I don't think there is a real conflict here, just terms being used in different ways.
Hi Tvad. I said that because people who know say so. I am not a
Aren't voices and instruments recorded using
Recording devices are initially set up to a baseline prior to recording sessions
to ensure the recording is in accordance to industry guidelines (for phase,
channel orientation and separation, and signal to noise ratio, etc) to ensure
consistent quality playback. This was the purpose of the RIAA guidelines. TV
and film uses baseline settings as well to ensure correct playback for
broadcast and theatrical screening.
Certainly, resolution is measurable in terms that Almarg described, i.e. bits
and sample rates. I was under the impression that you were stating that
system resolution is measurable. I imagine one's system could be
analyzed for signal to noise ratio and for frequency balance, but substantial
differences in everyone's rooms and environments makes any comparison of
measurements from system to system meaningless, IMO. For example,
assemble your system in another house in another neighborhood, and I'll
wager the measurements would be completely different due to changes in
room acoustics and environmental noise, even though the
system remains the same.
BTW, since you use redbook CD as your source (considering you use
a non-oversampling DAC, correct?), then your system is actually *less*
resolving than those that utilize higher resolution source formats such as
SACD, DVD-A, and vinyl.
I know you prefer the sound of NOS DACs, but the resolution measurements
for the format are inferior from a technical standpoint.
Tvad, I will stand down on the subject of measuring resolution. It is far more complicated, and not fully reliable than I had been led to believe.
On SACD, DVD-A, you are wrong. I have proved it on my system numerous times. All oversampling and upsampling players suck. There is no more accurate term. The highs always sound contrived. The stage is shallow, and short. The mids are always grainy. They all support the generally their bad reviews compared to vinyl here and elsewhere.
My Audio Note DAC is an AN in name only. It has been reworked to get rid of the choked, rolled off British sound they all have, down to their most expensive AN DACs. The stock Audio Note house sound is partially accomplished by utilizing frequency limiting diodes, for instance.
My AN DAC sounds natural. When called upon, it can bring the house down with orchestra crescendos at full cry. Then, it can gently finesse a delectable classical guitar solo. Everything sounds the way they are.
This system will go on show. It didn't happen this year due to last minute snags. Next year we will put all doubters to rest. I will happily entertain anyone's vaunted SACD player, or obscenely priced SCs. I can guarantee any taker, you will all go away deeply embarrassed.
Tvad, I will stand down on the subject of measuring resolution. It is far more complicated, and not fully reliable than I had been led to believe.<<
To the contrary, it is very simple.
Resolution is not measurable.
I would stick with the Anti brand if you already have and like their speaker cable. IMO you can't go wrong with the same brand wiring your entire rig. Likely, you'll be fine and experience no RF interference. I myself run unshielded cabling in my entire system (one brand also) and have never experienced any hum or RF issues with a number of different components, both SS and tube.
Anti has a return policy, no? Nothing to lose and worth trying I would think.