Yes and I love them; the interconnects are especially good.
109 responses Add your response
For a tenth of the price you can do just as well. When will people realise how much they are getting ripped by the cable hoax. Yes cables make a difference. But you dont need to spend more than a few hundred dollars to ge the best thier is. Its not like a car where you get what you pay for. Wire is wire. Spend money on gear. Put it in a great source.
I just had a pair of the Purist Annivesary (Aqueous?) IC's in my sytem and didn't like them very well. I was expecting big things becouse I have been so impressed with the other Purist stuff I have tried.
I currently have Purist Venustas Bi-wire skr. cables and IC's. ALso running Hovland MG II's on my TT, and Audioquest Sky on CD player. I found the Anniversary's to be closed in sounding with little detail, or resolution. Bottom end was lacking too........ Sorry, but they just didn't work for me.
Muratc I have only heard the Purist Aqueous Anniversary cables; have not heard the Purist Anniversary as they are way too expensive for me. I'm sure Albert Porter will comment on the Purist Anniversary cables; I believe he has them in his system. From what I have been told they are about as good as it gets.
I have not heard the new anniversary cables, but I have heard all of the other better cables that Purist makes. I only have one pair of Opis ICs in my current system, but even as expensive as Purist cables are, they are worth the money. People like Mapleleafs3 are always shooting off their mouths, but never have anything to offer the discussion. I hope it's cold up there.
I had a pair of one meter IC's between my CD player and Preamp. Other IC's I compared them to where: Purist Venustas, Audioquest Sky, and Cardas golden cross. I prety much liked the cables in this order too........... I am still sold on the Venustas. I think they outperformed the others hands down. Like I always say though....... This was in my room, in my sytem, with my music. So YMMV...
Nutella, are you not an Italian chocolate spread. Great on toast.
just buy some beldon cable a buck a foot put some shrink wrap on it ok RCA's and there you go. Its not rocket science.
Strip the cable and I bet you its Either made by beldon or pirelli and a 100 foot spool is like 100.00. Then Purist puts a pretty jacket on it.
"I mention this only because it might be contrary to conventional wisdom to use the more colored IC from CDP to preamp,....."
If a cable is colored, I can not see how any conclusion can be made that a specific link should be the place for such a cable. The only way to know if it may work anywhere in the system is to try it throughout and hope that "sonic nirvana" ultimately locks in with the current system implementation. Any subsequent change in the system could quickly uncover problems with this colored cable that then results in it needing to be replaced.
"since most listeners consider the Aqueous to be the more detailed and accurate of the two ......"
Well count me out on this one. I just borrowed the Aqueous Anniv (AA) XLR ICs and speaker cables and compared to Opis spkr cable, Venustas and Dominus ICs. From phono or DAC to line stage, I did prefer the AA in the context of my system but not because of its neutrality.
I would characterize the Venustas as subtractive in the ultimate portrayal of dynamics and ambience/bloom. But it is a very tonally coherent cable in my system no matter where I have tried it. If you like a little bit of a mellow presentation, the Venustas is a perfect choice.
The AA was VIVID with much ambience and bloom in the upper frequency range that was beyond the Dominus. It was clear to me that the AA was by far the most colored Purist cable with its prominent hump in the mids. I liked the AA the most from sources to line stage, but I am more aware now than ever before, if I change any component in my system and the mids get out of control, the first thing to do is try another IC in place of the AA and determine if tonal coherency returns. The AA XLR reminded me of the Cardas Golden Cross XLR except the Cardas does not have the treble extension of the AA.
With the AA XLR in place from sources to line stage, I then switched from the Opis spkr cable to the AA. Immediately the tonal coherency was way out of balance. The AA spkr cable made the mids too fat and fatiguing. I like a little shift into the warm zone but this was even way too much for me. A return to the Opis spkr cable and not only was there coherency again, but the very top was more detailed as well.
From all this, I came to like the AA sound but it was far too much of a good thing when used as an IC AND a speaker cable. Perhaps a solid state based system would benefit from a system fully loaded with AA's.
I did try one last experiment with the Venustas IC and AA speaker cable. This has a similar presentation to the AA IC and Opis speaker cable, but the AA IC/Opis spkr combination was more natural with no fatigue. I simply could not get rid of all the fatigue when I had the AA speaker cable no matter what else I tried in the system. All PCs and remaining ICs are currently Dominus.
From all this, the cable that impresses me like no other so far is the Opis speaker cable. Nice nice nice. This is a long-term keeper as it is an unbeatable value.
If you want drop-dead neutrality, you need to go to the Kubala-Sosna cables. If you like the added weight, bottom octave coverage, dynamics, textures, etc., of the Purist as I do, it takes a lot of work to mix and match to get the magic to lock in....and it can be very rewarding....but it can also be very frustrating and exhausting. There simply is no such thing as the Venustas or Opis or AA being labeled the best. You have to try all of these in each link and determine for yourself what results you like.
Maplelaughs, I have done all the relevant diy cable recepies and while most are good, they don't compare to any of the cables in my system. The cheapest being $200.
BTW my moniker was what popped into my head when I first went on the 'gon to replace the speaker cables my chocolate lab helped destroy.
John and Tvad,
You findings on the Anniversary cables are interesting. I am not sure what's going on, but I heard almost the opposite in my system when comparing them to Venustas and other cables. It was as if a scrim was put over my view of the music as the AA cables were most subtractive in upper octave energy. Both the Venustas and Sky that I have for comparison restored detail and resolution when I went back to them. The AA felt very soft in the bottom end as well.............. Hmmmmmm
Mine were from the Cable Company..... It really sounds like the cables I tried where not broken in. However, I was told that they had been in their demo stock for about four weeks, and I would think that they put them on some kind of cable cooker to begin with. It's kind of a shame becouse I really was expecting big things from the AA.
Chris, I must admit I too had very high expectations of the AA taking my system by storm. And I liked what the one cable did in my system so much so that I kept it. But unlike any cable I have tried in a long time, this cable is very system and even system-link dependent. With such differing observations on this cable as indicated here, I don't know how anyone could make a pre-judgement on this cable ..... they must try it themself.
i am currently auditioning the Aniversary Aqueous cables in my system right now. They are definitely nice cables. Pretty smooth in the mid range with a nice full bottom end. The cables have only been in my system for 2 days...I will comment more as I get a chance to listen to them more. So far, I like them more than the other cables I have heard (Acoustic Zen, Synergistic Research, Transparent, Nordost). I am looking to add better soundstaging to my system with some emphasis on vocals. i want a holographic imaging of the vocals. these cables do a nice job of presenting the vocals in a smooth manner.
more to come later.
Nutella. go to www.diycable.com tnt audio jon Risch site pick a rwecipe and go on your way.
Wires are the lat part of you sysytem. Spend the money on gear first.
If you have more money in wire than you have in your source, you re not hearing your speakers as well as you should be. When you have sttlled on you system then work the wire.
I was part of the auditioning gang at CMO's place and will corroborate his findings on Aqueous. My personal descending order of preference as follows: 1: AQ Sky by a significant margin, 2: Cardas Golden Cross, 3: Purist Venusta, 4: Purist Aqueous 20th Anniversary last by a significant margin. And yes, it was a blind test for me. I am really curious to know if the Aqueous were unbroken, defective, or equipment mismatch, or it was mayhaps a glaring case of the Acqueous suffering from Andersen's Chorea.
Guido: CGC in 2nd place? Interesting results. I have not heard the CGC for over 5 years but remember its fat midrange and average performance on the top. Would be interesting to hear it again one of these days.
Well Chris look at it this way, with Guido's glaring report, you should be able to get top dollar for the AQ! 8-)
Stanhifi, you have as much intelligent input to offer as Mapleleafs3. Between the comments the two of you make, the info should cancel out.
NO ONE HAS EVER BOUGHT CABLE TO GRATIFY THEIR EGO!!!!!!!!!!!
My current system is not up to previous standards, but I have owned many better cables and spent a lot of money, not to mention the discord with my first wife. I bought expensive cable inspite of my own protest! I did not want to spend the money, but I wanted the sonic improvement they provided. If I could have gotten the same improvement from all these junk cables that twits like maplelaughs and stan recommend I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT THEM years ago. The cable they push is not worth the webspace it takes to post them.
Sorry for the tirade, I must have gas or something!
JAFOX, several weeks past since the audition at CMO's place, so some details are turning fuzzy (or should I say 'Aqueous'?). I could easily switch the Cardas Golden Cross and the Purist Venusta around in my ranking. Overall the Venusta sounded more 'refined' than the CGC, whereas the CGC sounded slightly coarse with less overtones ringing to the surface. On the other hand, the CGC seemed to have a larger, deeper soundstage. The venusta is certainly slightly warmer than the AQ Sky and to some ears it may give the impression of a slight veil over the music. Other listeners by contrast may find the Sky to be too stark. I personally preferred the overall presentation of the Sky: extremely extended from top to bottom without apparent hot-spots in any frequency range and -- at least in my view and for the selection of music I brought over -- Edgar Meyer playing Bach on double bass and Dvorak's New World Symphony conducted by Bernstein -- sky had the most interesting, revealing yet unadorned and authoritative presentation with the highest harmonics content. Yet the Venusta is a great IC and I understand perfectly how CMO can be in love with its beauty and velvet glow.
Mapleleafs, You are right, gear first, cables second. I have done the Risch cables as well as others such as various cables made with differing gauges of magnet wire. The results all were excellent. But the results with the PAD cables were much better. Even with the lower end PAD.
Feel free to email me and we can discuss gear. We may disagree on cables but I have read your posts and we agree on quite a lot.
Cmo and Tvad, since you both have had a chance to hear the 20th Anniversary Aqueous and the Venustas, I'd like to get your thoughts on which has better high frequency extension. Not "pushed" mind you, but open, clear, still musical.
If there's one thing that holds me back from the Venustas is that I've heard they can be a little "closed" in the midrange. Not as open or articulate as some. Your thoughts on this as well would be very much appreciated.
Well.......... It's like I said earlier; I greatly preferred the Venustas to the AA. I don't know if it was some kind of system mis-match (which I doubt) or the cables were not broken in as advertised. I have not found a cable that I prefer to the Venustas in my system. Are they closed in?........ NOT. I find them to be as detailed as the AQ Sky, but to also have a more textured, three dimensional quality. Guido is right on the money with his assessment of the Sky; it's very revealing and extended from top to bottom. The point that I think the Venustas betters the AQ (and where I differ from Guido's take) is in Harmonic complexity........... and again, that happens (for me) in the midrange.
The one place that I think the AQ betters the Venustas is bottom end extension. The bass is a little tighter and deeper with the AQ.
As to the question of AA or venustas..... I would have to say borrow the cables from the Cable Co. and judge for yourself. I am not trying to be elusive, but it looks like people are having some very different results with the AA at this point.