I'd rather use the Monster Cable than a $3.00 cable from Walmart.Well, I'd rather use what works including $3 cable from Walmart.
29 responses Add your response
No the solution to the problem is to use wire that matches component weather it's $3 ones from Walmart or not.
The idea of cabling is not tied up to the cable quality or brand, but rather to the system synergy.
Please read the last part of my question to understand what type of information I am asking for.
'however my question being, which extensions and where do I find them?'
i.e. right angle extensions
I used HH Scott tube Stereomaster integrated (not tuner)with Canare pro-grade interconnects purchased from B&H photovideo in NYC.
I had enough clearance with those to fit them together.
I'd try to unscrew one or both RCA terminal(s) and slide screw cup back leaving the termination 'naked'.
Many of AudioQuest models would have RCA terminals relatively thin compared to Monster or even other brands.
The narrow spacing of input/output connectors on vintage equipment is a problem for the modern audiophiles. If you replace the connectors you lower the resale value since most collectors value original condition items. I have a Fisher 400 and I ended up using inexpensive Radio Shack interconnects. It is what it is.
Very familiar with Scott tuners, and yes, it's a problem using better cables on them.
IMHO, right angle extensions may also be to large, especially the better ones, and even the cheap adapters tend to be larger than cheap RCA cables due to the nature of the construction.
Not easy to find, but some better cables used a slender RCA, like the original Audience Conductor. I have a friend that uses these on a Scott tuner with no problem.
Agree with Onhwy61. If you're audiophile and perfectionist obsessed with quality of interconnects, forget about vintage stuff -- they won't match it and OP already heard it from more than one contributor...
Recommendation to use angled adapters is TOTALLY outside of audiophile concept and purity. What's the point to add an extra ANGLED connection?? Dood, you'll come back to the quality of $3 Walmart or Trisonic cable even with yer Monstor interconnects or Transparent or Schmonster, because connection quality is substantially more critical than quality of wire. In blind A/B you'll guess 50% wrong or more percentage towards $3 Walmart. In both cases you again and again come back to $3 Trisonic or Walmart cable.
The problem wasn't exactly the connection as I had thought. I found a pair of right angle adapters for less than a cheaper interconnect cable at Radio Shack and at a certain angle, they both fit tight.
My problem is that I don't have enough neutral between the tuner and my DAC. They're somewhat close together but not so much so that I could have envisioned this to be a problem. So what to do; disconnect the DAC interconnects at the back of the amp and the volume increases exponentially.
Fortunately I don't listen to a a lot of radio so I won't have to go through this routine very often.
Anybody know where I can find a 350 Stereomaster manual and schematic? I'm thinking about comparing the multiplex circuitry with the 310 E to see if if I can modify it in the 350 as well as other tweaks (by my tech.). I'm assuming that now the 350 is probably operating at around 50%.
You can find schematics for the 350-B, C, & D at HHScott.com. You MIGHT also be able to find a manual at the same site, via this link, if you have Java Runtime Environment installed.
My problem is that I don't have enough neutral between the tuner and my DAC. They're somewhat close together but not so much so that I could have envisioned this to be a problem. So what to do; disconnect the DAC interconnects at the back of the amp and the volume increases exponentially.I have no idea what the first two sentences mean, but it sounds like the input select function of the integrated amp may have a problem, and is shorting the inputs from the two sources together.
In addition to the links provided by Al, another source for info is vintageshifi.com, and there is a schematic for the original 350, in case that is the one you have. Also relevant would be the LT-110 alignment info. Early LT-110's were a kit versions of the original 350's, however one tube in the IF section was different. Later LT-110's were kit versions of the 350B. There is also a schematic and service bulletin for the 310E. Compared to the 350's, including B and C models, and the LT-110's, the 310E's multiplexer was different. The 310E also used an additional IF stage like the 310D tuner.
Thank you Tls49! I now have the schematics that I need and I've been searching for those for a couple of weeks now.
The current problem which is the most noticeable in my 350 pertains to the Multiplex Stereo. Mono sounds fine but Stereo sounds like gravel aggregate.
My hope is that the local technician will resolve this problem and that I'll come out clean under what I would have paid for a Mapleshade tuner. But if not, no big deal.
Thanks to everyone, I'm very grateful to have this source for information. I had no idea that the topic would end up taking a different direction from where it started but the documents that I've collected will be extremely helpful to both myself and my local technician.
I may post the tweaks and changes that were done once my radio has been serviced and I'll give my impression of its overall performance as well.