Anyone settled in on Purist Aqueous interconnects?

I am interested in these interconnects. Has anyone out there used them and actually given them time to break-in? I know the break-in time is significant (200 hours) and was hoping someone might have some perspective on them after this break-in time. I actually have the new Aqueous Anniversary bi-wired speaker cable and love them. So, I was thinking synergy with the aqueous interconnects??!!
I've been using them for about a year, both the IC's and the speaker cables. The IC's have exactly the same sonic qualities as the speaker cables. I'd tried many different IC's (Cerious, Analysis Plus, Audience, Nirvana, Harmonic Tech Cyberlights, etc.), and I find the Aqueous Anniversary to be the most balanced top to bottom.
I'd be curious about these too. I tried the speaker cable recently(thanks for your contrib Boa2 on that thread I opened) and thinking of borrowing a whole set again after new years to try as a system. Really liked the sp cables though...they are very dynamic with excellent drive and slam. In this department they sure beat my AU24 speaker cables. And they worked great with my AZ interconnects, but I am curious if there will be more synergy with PAD Anniv Aqueous ICs as well. Jppenn, if you happen to try these, please let me know what you think. thanks
I have used them for over a year now in conjunction with Purist Audio Venustas. Boa2's description is very good. I like the Aqueous/Venustas combination. I didn't care for the sound of two paris of Aqueous ICs in the same signal chain...too detailed and not enough warmth. The Venustas have a touch of coloration which is absent in the Aqueous, IMO. I tend to like a little color to suit my taste.

There is a fair amount of discussion in the threads about the characteristics of these ICs.
I tried the Aqueous balanced interconnects between my wadia cd player and my ayre amp. I thought the cable had some nice qualities but after about 200hrs break in and listening to some other cables, I felt that it was more of a band-aid product than a neutral one. The top end seemed to be rolled off to such an extent that some of the music was lost. This may or may not be a big deal depending on your system. Also, and more importantly, there was a roughness in the high freq. that is sometimes associated with copper cables. The other cables I compared this cable to are the cardas golden ref. This cable lets a lot more information pass at all freq. but does not have roughness in the treb. My AQ jag and panther (both copper) are also very smooth and clean from top to bottom but lack the scale of the cardas. I do not know a lot about pruist but I think that if they made a similiar design in silver, I would have liked it better in my system.

01-02-07: R1g_audio
I tried the Aqueous balanced interconnects between my wadia cd player and my ayre amp... The top end seemed to be rolled off to such an extent that some of the music was lost.

That's very interesting. I have found exactly the opposite to be true in my system using RCA Aqueous interconnects.

Also, and more importantly, there was a roughness in the high freq. that is sometimes associated with copper cables.

FWIW, Purist Audio Aqueous interconnects are constructed with a mix of gold and copper wire.

In my auditioning of interconnects, I have found no universal correlation between roughness in the treble and copper wire, or with silver wire. I have heard treble roughness in interconnects constructed of only silver wire, and in interconnects constructed of only copper wire.
This wire still seems to have a polarized opinion associated with it. I tried it a year or so ago and thought it was almost unlistenable..... And I am a huge fan of Purist products.

I borrowed from the Cable Co. and was assured they were burnt and broken in. In comparison to my AQ, Purist Venustas and the Cardas cables on loan I too thought the Aqueous was rolled off..... Don't know, maybe I should give them another try. It was almost like they were broken.... Then again. how the heck do you break a cable?

The two reports of rolled off highs in Aqueous interconnects have come from people who auditioned balanced versions of the cable.

I wonder if the XLR versions were not wired in a manner that corresponded to the pin configuration in your equipment? I have no idea if this would result in a rolled off presentation, or if this would result in no sound whatsoever. However, I do know that I have owned equipment with XLR inputs and outputs in which the pin configurations were different.

FWIW, Aqueous interconnects are so extended in my system that I would never use two pairs together. I prefer a pair of Venustas in combination with Aqueous. Even swapping their placement has an affect on the sound.
When I comparred the cardas gold. ref with a Nordost Valhalla I had exactely the same result. You wil miss a lot of resolution. Because the Cardas filters a part in the middle freq. When we went back to the Valhalla you knew you missed a lot of information
I put some balanced Purist Aqueous interconnects in my system a couple of months ago. I have them between a VTL 6.5 preamp and a pair of Bel Canto Evo 2 Gen 2 amps running in mono. I had been warned by some friends that they require a good deal of break in time. I found this to be absolutely true. When I first installed them, they sounded incredibly nasal. Very tight and rolled off. Over the next couple of hundred hours, they underwent a lot of changes. At first, they opened up on top and got muddy in the mid bass. Then, they tightened at the bottom and got rolled off sounding on top. After about 200 hours, they became much more tonally neutral and reasonably dynamic. Still, they weren't a significant improvement over the Analysis Plus Solo Crystal Oval that I replaced. It was actually at around 400-500 hours that they turned a corner! They really did in a way I've never heard from any audio component. One day, they just seemed to open up wide and deep. I was almost dizzy from the added 3-dimensionality. My impression that there is something very unusual about the properties of the liquid jacket in this cable which makes break-in so crucial. In any event, I'm now totally happy with the Aqueous.
Have you auditioned Purist Aqueous, Leonx? Perhaps I missed that post.
I'll bring this thread back to life again.

Jppenn, what did you end up with? Do you still own the Aqueous ICs? Care to comment?

Also, has anyone had the Purist 20th Anniv. Aqueous ICs compared to AZ SIlver Ref II and Matrix Ref II interconnects? XLR versions.

I'd be interested to know...thanks
For the second time I'm bringing this thread back to life.

I've arranged for a demo of Aqueous XLR interconnects from Cable Co. I will be getting them soon. I'll compare them to my current Acoustic Zen Silver Ref II and Matrix Ref II set up. Plus I will try the Aqueous in various combination with either of the AZs.

Since I have the PAD 20th Anniv. Aqueous speaker cables and like them a lot, I just couldn't resist trying the interconnects.

What makes it tempting to try is that some on this thread reported the RCA version of PAD 20th Anniversary Aqueous to be bright. Others report the XLR version of these ICs to be rolled off.

Well, I won't be testing the RCA version of the Aqueous because I use all balanced cabling throughout, but as far as the XLR version, I'm about to find out first hand how an all Aqueous cabling sounds like in my system.
Should be interesting.
I received the 2 pairs of Aqueous XLRs from Cable Company today.

Had a brief listening session with my current config of AZ Silver Ref MkII/Matrix Ref MkII of XLR ICs, teamed up with my PAD Aqueous speaker cables.

Got a sonic imprint of the sound with the Zens and installed both pairs of PAD XLRs replacing the Zens.

Had a brief listening session, about 40-45 minutes. System isn't really fully warmed up yet and the cables aren't settled in. far I am very impressed. Totally beyond my expectations. Especially given the opinions I've read on this thread.

I prefer all Aqueous cabling at this point. I like the synergy between my Aqueous speaker cables and the Aqueous XLRs. Overall I much prefer this combination to Aqueous speaker cables with Acoustic Zen Silver Ref II + Matrix Ref II XLRs, although it sounds very good that way as well.

Preliminary results:
I would characterize the sound of my system with these cables as very musical, not analytical at all, inviting for longer listening sessions. There is no high frequency glare. Not in-your-face detail. Extension at frequency extremes is excellent! Deep, powerful and detailed bass. Airy and sweet highs. Plenty of detail in the highs but more laid back than the AZ. May be even better resolution than the AZ combo in absolute terms, although it seems easier to listen to. Mids is where this cable has it in spades over the AZ combo. Vibrancy and texture of the midrange is increadible.

I am well aware of the fact that PAD Aqueous cables tend to settle in and sound different after certain amount of music making time, but so far so good Very good indeed.

We'll see how they stand the test of time.
If they don't start to degrade sonically when they stabilize, I think I found my next interconnect cable.