PAD Venustas

Hi, I never had the chance to listen to it.
anyone out there who uses it - or made comparisons - and can give a small description of it?
Is is smooth sounding?
I've tried the Venustas in several systems, and what I connect with in particular is a seductive, warm midrange. The first time I heard our system with them, I fell asleep, the music was that soothing. And after having tried some 20+ IC's, I was then sold on the Purist approach. That said, the Venustas is not as fully extended or as pure sounding as the Aqueous Anniversary, IMO. We use the Aqueous between the CDP and preamp, and the Venustas between the amp and preamp. In the CDP/preamp position, the Venustas sounds great, but the music has less bite and immediacy to it. Because it is slightly rolled off on the top, the Venustas seems to allow more bass to come through, but I would say that the bass is not as defined as with the Aqueous. In a word, the Venustas sounds 'tuned', while the Aqueous sounds transparent. We also have horn speakers, and I believe the Aqueous Anniversary is complimentary to the energetic delivery of the horns, while the Venustas will have more of an effect of taming them, albeit only marginally.

Hope that helps.
I agree 100% with Boa2's description and comparison of the Venustas and Aqueous Anniversary interconnects.
How about the speaker cables ?
We use the Aqueous Anniversary speaker cables, and love them. I have not heard the Venustas speaker cables. The Aqueous had a similar effect as the IC. Transparent, flawless tone, with excellent extension top to bottom. I think I've read here, however, that the most favorable reports come from those with high efficiency speakers. Ours happen to be 104dB. If I remember correctly, Ozzy, you didn't like them. Do I have that right?

One other thing. The cables initially have a tinge of glare, and the bass is not fully defined. 100+ hours helps things settle in, and the Purist burn-in disc brings a textural richness and liquidity to the sound.
I have only heard the Venustas IC, but I fully agree with Boa2 comments. They are spot on.
I currently own Venustas interconnect between my preamp and amp. Also, my tonearm and phono stage. Opis between my cd and pre. Dominus speaker cables and AC cords.

The Venustas trashed my previous Transparent Ref w/XL. 1/2 the price too (list). Litterally, better everwhere. Ditto the Cardas Golden Reference. On the speaker cords, also replaced Trans Ref w xl. Power cords that got quickly replaces were FIM Gold and 2 Kimber Palladian PK10's. I have heard the Aqueous as well as own the Opis. All 3 of these cables are close. Seems like a lot of us mix and mix a little. Differences are subtle, but they are there and can really complete a system with just a little matching.

Bottom line, try the venustas. It's a steal right now used. One set will likley hook you on the Purist line up.

Opis or Aquaquesous should be tried at some point as well...
I bought new the 'Venustas'xlr ic's, and 'Dominus with Ferox' power cords.Thinking they would be my last cable changes.
Has all been replaced by "Nirvana S-X".Much better in all aspects and in whatever adjectives you use to compare and describe.And yes there will be no more changes.
I've had the Cardas Golden Ref.,Golden Cross lineup and Audience AU24 line up as well and with a little 'VD' NiteII thrown in for good measuring.
This is in my system,with my ears,and processor.
Good luck.Hope you find an easier way to get the sound you desire.

05-25-06: Peterd
I bought new the 'Venustas'xlr ic's, and 'Dominus with Ferox' power cords.Thinking they would be my last cable changes.
Has all been replaced by "Nirvana S-X".Much better in all aspects and in whatever adjectives you use to compare and describe.
I have owned Nirvana SX and Nirvana SL interconnects...simultaneously. In my system, the Venustas ICs are clearly preferrable. This just proves there are no absolutes in this hobby. All things are system and listener dependent, and we all should be careful about proclaiming anything as best for everyone. IMO.
For a short time I had the Aqueous along with HT Magic woofer/tweeter Speaker cables on trial from the cable Company.
However, during that time the HT cables with there large spades, shorted my Amp out and I had to cut the audtion short.
I do remember that they were not quite up to what I was used to. (Ridgestreet Audio). But now I wonder if I gave them really a fair audtion.
I have read that the Veustus sort of dulls the frequency extrems, accenting the midrange compared to the Aqueous.
But, other posts say the Venustus improves the bass region.
Thanks for all the answers. Well, seems, the whole spectrum is offered. Hm, what I really want to have is clarity. Seems, I have to look for a different brand. Will check out Paul Speltz' Anti IC.
I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that Venusats would not give you clarity, but everyone interprets comments differently I guess. Certainly Purist Aqueous Anniversary would give you outstanding clarity.

I'm befuddled by your conclusion. But, lots of folks like the Speltz wire. Good luck.
The Speltz speaker cables are all about clarity in my experience. But I have not heard anything from Purist.
I have the chance to listen to the Venustas in my own System, and I agree with Boa2. It is soft in the high frequencies, all I can say, I miss with that cable lots of information which is there. Has nothing to do with an agressive high frequeny area, but some information is just not "there" in the way it should ( IMHO).
06-08-06: Thomasheisig
I have the chance to listen to the Venustas in my own System, and I agree with Boa2. It is soft in the high frequencies, all I can say, I miss with that cable lots of information which is there. Has nothing to do with an agressive high frequeny area, but some information is just not "there" in the way it should ( IMHO).
I agree with the Venustas being soft in the highs.

Aqueous Anniversary will give you all the information that's there...and so will a host of other cables. IMO, Aqueous Anniversary are excellent interconnects, but they do not possess the magic of the Venustas...which is due to some coloration...and is why I use a pair of each.
I use Venustas speaker cables and do not feel they are missing anything at all in the highs. They simply do not emphasize the highs as some cables do, creating the aural illusion of greater range and transparency. One man's opinion and experience. Have not heard the Anniv. Aqueous so cannot comment on them.

A recent converastion with a big time Purist dealer commented that there are very few Venustus cables being sold. Most sales are going towards the Aqueuos.
For what that is worth.
06-09-06: Ozzy
A recent converastion with a big time Purist dealer commented that there are very few Venustus cables being sold. Most sales are going towards the Aqueuos.
That could mean buyers gravitating toward the newest thing. It could mean dealers encouraging one over the other. It could mean people not buying Venustas because of what they read on the internet without actually trying them. Or, it could simply mean more people like Aqueous than Venustas.

My real world experience is that friends who use PAD interconnects in tubed and solid state systems prefer a combination of Venustas and Aqueous, and the division is pretty much 50/50 between the two models.
I agree that the newest cable is probably getting the attention.
But,I have been trying really hard to audition a Veustus bi-wire set of speaker cables.
No dealer so far has them to audition, and has no plans to obtain them.
Well, most wrote, that the Venustas is far better than the Anniversary Aqueous.
Now are a few here, who think, that the Aqueous can give more information ???
Sorry, but that sounds strange. How comes?
The perception of more information in the AA spkr cables to me resulted in listener fatigue. With the AA IC, it was not fatigue but rather the added presence and greater amplitude in the midrange and trebles over the Venustas. This brought the presentation more out into the room. With the Venustas IC, the sound was more relaxed and thus gzve a presentation as if sitting farther back. With the ICs, it is not an issue of what is "better" but rather what is preferable to that person AND in that specific link of THAT system. This is why you absolutely need to try both of these yourself at each IC link in your system. I would not be surprised if you ended up with one of each as is the case for me. And it sure helps to have a Dominus IC to compare as it gives you an idea of the next level of refinements across the board.
Jafox: that is the one thing I found a bit lacking with the Venustas: because of the very polite and laid back character, there is less of "involvement" into the music. The sound is very refined though. Maybe it has also something to do with PRaT. What is your opinion?

Dazzdax: This is a tough characterization to describe. Yes, I agree, the Venustas is very refined. And because of this, there is greater delineation between the notes .... more subtle details can be heard. But because of the more "mellow" nature here, it can indeed take away from some of that explosive and "boogie" factor that we often associate with greater presence in some frequency regions over others.

I have found over and over that the IC from line stage to the amp is the most critical in the system when it comes to capturing and retaining the 3-dimensionality, bloom and decays. And because of this, only a handful of cables have worked for me here over the years: Cardas Golden Cross, NBS Statement, MIT 350 EVO and now Dominus. But none of these cables exhibit the last word in terms of low-level resolution. I have always sought out complimentary cables elsewhere in the system to bring on more detail and blacker background. And it has been these latter cables that have gone through many iterations as I look to gain more "view" into the performance while balancing out with the dimensional aspects (as mentioned above) that I worked so hard to achieve from the start.

As for PRaT, I still really have no idea what is at the core of the meaning here. I had a Linn LP12/Ittok for 18 years with various cartridges: Supex SD900, Shinon Red, Sumiko Virtuoso, Benz Glider, and this was an incredibly musical system, especially with the Shinon and Sumiko. But the Clearaudio Ref TT that came later literally destroyed the Linn in bottom octave coverage, far greater resolution and with greater tonally coherency. The Linn had all this hype of PRaT and toe-tapping, and yet to me, the Clearaudio got me far more into the performance for a multitude of reasons. So I do not think of characterizations like pace or timing, etc., but rather tonal coherency, dynamic contrasts, initial attack of each note, harmonic textures, articulation and the almighty forever lasting decays of piano, sax and voice. And so far from what I have heard in my system, the one IC that brings all these together like no other is the Dominus. But since I can not afford 4 of these in my system, I try to balance out by mixing/matching with the more affordable ICs in the less critical system links.

Hi all

I thought I should chime in here as I've had recently had the Venustas I/C's in my system. As many above have stated, they are not the most resolving cables. However there's a rightness to the sound that is very appealing.

What troubled me was a "hooded" coloration in the mids which was quite obvious on vocals, and when playing warm recordings like Lizz Wright's "Dreaming Wide Awake" or Cassandra Wilson's NMD etc, the vocal can sound almost muffled.

I just traded in the Venustas for the PAD "AK Limited", a special edition cable made for the Singapore distributor, which is touted to be "between Venusta and Dominus" in terms of sound quality (and price).

This cable is *superb* on the mids, none of that hooded quality of the Venustas and more extended and refined at the frquency extremes. It has even more of a "rightness" to the sound that may make you think, "ahh... finally a cable that does everything".

However, swapping back in my Siltech G5 gold/silver I/C's, suddenly there was more ambient information, more detail in the highest frequencies, and I realised that even the AK is not the ultimate. Perhaps that is reserved for the Dominus.

However, the combo of Siltech from cd-to-pre and AK Limited from pre-to-power is a synergistic one, preserving the resolution of the Siltech with some welcome warmth and "rounding out" from the PAD.

Overall, I would say the signature of PAD cables is a ripe, well developed mid-range, perhaps at the expense of the frequency extremes. As you move higher up the range, you get better highs and bass. I've not tried the Dominus yet.

The AK Limited, if you get a chance to hear it, is amazing on vocals. When you plug them in, suddenly you not listening to "a recording of the sound of a voice singing" anymore, but you're hearing a *person* singing, palpable, humane, and alive sounding. Very special indeed.

Taking the AK out from between the CD and pre, and inserting it between the pre and power (replacing Cardas Golden reference) I lost a little of the magic of the mids, but I cant live without the HF extension of the Siltech. The AK beat the Cardas GR on all fronts.

Above all i have learnt that cables are system and even component dependent, and the right cabling can make or break a system, but you need to try in your own setup

Kind regards

I have a Phono Cable from PAD for a check, it's name is HDI Phono Cable. That's a good one. Is it rare? What confuses me a little bit, it is cheaper than Venustas and better in my opinion. Anyone out there who knows it?
I demo'd both the purist acqueous anniversary and the purist dominus and the difference was so startling that I began to wander whether the purist acqueous anniversary were defective. They were both cooked by the dealer before sending to me and were demos to boot. The dominus also smoked by nordost valhallas so I figured the acqueous was not defective.

I have not tried the venustas but cannot imagine they are worse than the acqueous. But then again, all cables are system dependent and the more revealing your system is the better or worse a cable could potentially sound.

Now I just wish I could afford a 11 foot dominus speaker cable.
Kharmapolice, RE: Venustas and Aqueous Anniversary.

These two cables have similarities and differences, it seems to matter a great deal where in the system the comparison is made. Dominus is such a world beater it almost doesn't matter where it's placed, it is generally preferred.

Oddly enough, Europe seems to favor Aqueous Anniversary and the USA seems to favor Venustas. Differences? I would call the Venustas fuller in the bass and less forward in the midrange than Venustas. Venustas worked a miracle between phono cartridge and RIAA stage, actually beating my Dominus in that (one) position.

Since then I swapped all interconnect and speaker cables to the new top of the line Purist Anniversary. I judge them (about) half again the improvement Dominus is over Aqueous Anniversary.

I installed the new Purist Anniversary AC cables two weeks ago and am just now getting them broken in. These new AC cables surpass even the Auctorita (German Dominus) that was my previous standard.
"Oddly enough, Europe seems to favor Aqueous Anniversary and the USA seems to favor Venustas."

Albert, why do you think this is?
Tony, I honestly don't know.

The owner of Purist says Sweden and Germany are going absolutely crazy over Aqueous Anniversary, but of the guys here in the USA that have borrowed both from me, over half preferred Venustas.

Perhaps USA customers have significantly different taste in sound and/or music, or maybe it's something else, like overall effect on their stereo PLUS their surround sound. It's just wild guess at this point, maybe we can determine over time :^).
Maybe it has to with listening room sizes between USA, and Germany and Sweden, Just a ideal.
Interesting idea, I don't know. I asked myself that question too, but more with the Japanese kind of listening.
Do you think, it is different from the culture, that one likes it more analytic than the others ( for example )?
Hmm, this may be a thread in and of itself, but I find this of great interest. I've been very happy with PAD Venustas between my preamp and amp (Pass X1, FetValve 550EXR), but I use Acoustic Zen Silver Ref II between my source and preamp. Is it possible that provides the same result as those who have commented on the Aqueous Ann / Venustas combo?

If there's anything to that premise, then why would that sort of combination be of preferred use in the U.S.? Maybe Fuzzball is on to something. Would it be fair to say that, in general, the listening rooms in Europe are smaller than those in the U.S.? If so, does that suggest, again in general, a lower listening volume compared to U.S. audiophiles? Is it possible that at lower listening levels the AA somehow "works better" by comparison?

Albert, what sort of feedback have you received from those who wound up going with the Venustas?
Tony, Those that were specific preferred Venustas tonal balance, no mention of resolution or imaging differences.

Venustas supposedly delivered better bass, or perhaps "more" bass in relationship to the level of the midrange and highs. I believe our perception of tonal balance is linked to many things including imaging position of the mid and high frequencies in relation to the bass. I know I'm extremely sensitive in that regard.

I think Aqueous Anniversary is more likely to perform poorly prior to reaching maximum break in. Venustas errors by omission before maximum sound is reached, making it easier to live with before it maximizes. So, perhaps the Europeans are more patient than those of us in the USA where everything is better if it's instant.

Again, these are just guesses based on limited information. I should point out that customers that chose Aqueous said it was superior to the Venustas.

That's the way this hobby works :^).
Is there a difference between Venustas Phono and the regular Venustas Cable?
When yes, what?
Thomas, to my knowledge the only difference is the addition of a flexible link plus DIN or whatever plug fits your tonearm. The purpose of the flexible link is to reduce interference with the suspension of the turntable.

My Walker table had RCA outputs on a plate (from the factory) so when I was testing I had no problem using several brands of interconnects that were factory terminated with common RCA to RCA termination.

I loved the Venustas RCA interconnect in the phono position (Walker to Aesthetix Io), but admit I never got around to testing the Aqueous there.
Hello Thomasheisig

I have a Venustas Phono RCA to RCA and the (-)signal ground is isolated from shield ground, there is a little black wire with a spade you can attach to your equipment if you need the grounding like on a din tone-arm cable.
On the regular Venustas cable, (-)signal ground and shield ground are tied together I think.
Has anyone compared the PAD Venustas or Aqueous to the Audience Au24 interconnects?

I currently own the Audience Au24 RCA interconnects and, because of an equipment upgrade, have the opportunity to move to an XLR cable. I really like the sound characteristics of the Au24...ultra smooth midrange, esp for female vocals, relaxed, smooth presentation, treble without etch or glare, wide soundstage, etc. If there was any improvement area in this cable, I would like to hear more micro-level detail (again, without etch or glare), and perhaps a stronger bass response.

After doing some research on Audiogon, it would appear that the Purist Audio Venustas might be a good match. Has anyone tried both the Audience AU24 AND the Purist Venustas and made a comparison? Should I go with the Venustas....? or should I move up to the XLR version of the Audience Au24?

I would appreciate anyone's comments or recommendations!

I've owned all three. I liked the AU24 ICs when I owned them. I believe the Venustas have more in common with the AU24 than do the Aqueous. I also believe the Venustas convey a larger image with higher resolution than the AU24. It'd be wise to listen to both the Venustas and AU24 in your own system since your preferences may differ from mine.
I really like the sound characteristics of the Au24...ultra smooth midrange, esp for female vocals, relaxed, smooth presentation, treble without etch or glare, wide soundstage, etc.
I would say a couple of things. I've found with two components that I actually liked the music more with the RCAs than with the XLRs. They were the same cable, naturally, but both had the same effect of losing focus with the XLRs. YMMV, of course.

You obviously are a big fan of the AU24. I found them to be exactly as you describe, but within an hour I was really bored with the music. The Venustas have similar qualities--excellent bass as well--but in contrast to the AU24, I find the music to be enveloping and utterly engaging. My suggestion would be to pick up a used pair of Venustas, leave them in your system for 3-4 days (they may disappoint at first), and then go back to the AU24. Then you'll know which you prefer, and you could end up sticking with what you already have.

Best of luck!
I have been able to recently compare the Venustus against the Aqueous.
The Venustus has defintaly more bass but not tighter bass.
The Aqueous has more high end extension and better overall dynamics.
I prefer the Aqueous over the Venustus.
Funny, I tried the Aqueous early on from the Cable Co. and did not care for them, now they sound great!.
The first try, the set was probably not as burned in as the set I just tried.
In fact, when I tried them this time they did not sound so good in the midrange the first day but after a couple days they opened up.

I wonder though if 2 runs of Aqueous would be better still than a bi-wire set?
Ozzy, I agree generally with your comments, but you might find it beneficial to hang on to both (or own both). Why?

Venustas and Aqueous will perform differently when placed in different positions in the system chain. Also, they will positively or negatively affect the sound when used with different components. For example, When I owned an APL Denon 3910, I always used Aqueous from the APL to my preamp, and then Venuasts from the preamp to the amp. Now that I own an Exemplar Denon 3910, I find using the Venustas from the Exemplar to the preamp and the Aqueous from the preamp to the amp works best. While owning the APL, I once tried using two sets of Venustas and I hated the results...too "closed in". I also didn't care for two sets of Aqueous...too detailed and "in your face"". Now though, I might like two sets of Venustas, but I don't have another set to try.

The point is that while you might prefer the Aqueous now, you might prefer the Venustas later with different gear. They are both excellent.
Thats a good point. I agree.
Each piece of Equipment seems to lean towards a preference to a different cable.
I have been able to recently compare the Venustus against the Aqueous.
The Venustus has defintaly more bass but not tighter bass.
The Aqueous has more high end extension and better overall dynamics.

Ozzy, a bit more info please. Were the cables tested between your 3910 and Pass? How would you characterize the basic sound of both the APL and the Legacy? (I already know what the Pass sounds like.) I have heard many good things about the Aqueous, but I am still using the Venustas between by preamp and amp. The rest of my system is AZ Silver Ref II, so I'm wondering if I'm getting a similar "synergy" effect, and maybe using the Aqueous would be too much?
I was referring to the speaker cables.
I already own Dominus C Balanced interconnects between my APL and my Pass Amp.
By sticking with the Purist line , I was looking for synergy.
For those who have had owned both the Venustas ans Dominus interconnects, can you tell me the differences between the sound characteristics of both cables? How does the Dominus improve on the Venustas? Does the Dominus maintain the seductive midrange of the Venustas...or does it sound more like the Aqueous Anniversary? I would appreciate your comments.