Transparent's Network Boxes

I know this has been a topic before but I was wondering if anyone really knew what Transparent puts in those cool looking black boxes. God knows they charge enough for their cables and one would think they would put a picture of the network box contents on their website but no such luck. I've heard everything from a single cheap resistor hot glued in place to exactly three parts in each model no more or less. I've researched this on audio asylum and the opinions vary as well. If anyone knows for sure and better yet can direct us to a photo url, that would be wonderful.
Why don't you just listen to Transparent cables instead of making a decision based network contents?

This just turns into a flame thread about expensive cables.

If you can't hear the difference then don't buy them, and consider yourself blessed with the savings.
Based on your other thread you posted (you system is listed below) you should consider upgrading your CJ PV10a preamp. Upgrading to a placette, CJ Premier 14, CJ 17,or some other high end preamp will really suddenly open up the soundstage depth and width. You haven't even heard the true potential of your Super cables.

"My components consist of a Levinson 334, CJ PV10A, and Meridian 507 CD all plugged into Transparent's PI4. My speaker of choice is the Canton Ergo 900. I currently use Transparent Super XL speaker cable and a Powerlink Super cord on the amp"

I've tried 10k source in my system and instead upgraded to the next level Transparent cable( which cost more than my front end) and it was a bigger improvement in my system (of course both the upgrades were awesome but$$$$)
transparent's are good cables, but one should be conservative about what they can or can't do. i.e., get what you can afford, and take a hard look at your components, etc.
i have ref.w/xl (trade up) - i have no burning desire to get something else. the company's early literature suggested "not going overboard" in a way. basically, they do bass, and the're nice and clear, but i have had audioquest in the past and it was darn good too. plus, i got a ps audio power cable
(very reasonably) for my amps, and something wonderful is going on with the sound...
i have to agree with above posters. The differences between my Harm Tech Pro-9's and Transparent reference speaker cables were nil at best. It was like putting your speaker grills back over your speakers.

dave which cable provided the grills? in other words i hear a distint difference in the top end of my my system without grills.
Grills make a difference with my speakers also. My designer set the speakers up with the grills and said they are meant to be on as that is how he tuned them.

Even different stands make a difference. Some speakers are more critical to change than other's.

Last year I tested to see what cable designs worked best and then sent them to 7 people with various systems and some dealers to get feedback to see weather there would be synergy problems or issues.

I have listened to several systems with Transparent cables and while they are smooth I do not think the network boxes are beneficial. They might be better in some systems ,but in others they are not. I tried to design cables which had wide synergistic reliability with out clipping the freq extremes. Pretty hard thing to do.

Good luck!
I was actually able to get a network box open on a pair of transparent music wave plus. I couldn't really make out what the round, cylinder-like objects were under the hot glue. All I do know is that since then I have sold those cables and moved up to the Transparent Super level cables because they sounded damn good. They definitely have a very unique sound to them and they have incredible slam in low frequencies however I could see where this wouldn't be the right match for all systems. Bill
I cannot get past adding a network to cables as that ingest something which over rides the purity of the signal. Living in Maine I have heard their wires and am not impressed for teh price.
I've noticed a trend here and on other sites. It seems that the most consistent Transparent (and other well-known brands) bashers are people who assemble and sell cables as a hobby or home business.

Guys, let me give you a tip straight from Business 100 class: your business will not succeed on a strategy of bashing companies you consider to be competition.
I think Transparent & MIT are among the best cables out there. Of course, I own about $30K in audio equipment, so I can easily hear the difference. By the way, what is it about the network boxes from these manufacturers that lights up everyones' fire? Every cable company out there has megabuck cables in their line-up without the boxes and I don't hear nearly the same amount of chatter from audiophiles.
Tried them (Ultra's), they never worked in my system, dark, dull and to bass bloated bass. I did keep one set of interconnects that worked very nice between the cd player and the preamp and they were the Super balanced interconnects.

The other interconnects and speaker wire were a bust. They cost a lot, and after trying most of the brands out there, after the wire settles in there are defference, but they are small, in the end it's what sounds good to you.

No art to it, use your own ears, and make your decision based on sound, not on cost.

There is a web site that shows what is in the boxes and it was not much of anything.
Paul I used to have a URL reference which thoroughly explained the networks; I've lost track of it but will try to dig it up again (a kind soul here had posted that info. years ago). The networks are often a source of contention among purists, etc, who don't understand their purpose nor their architecture. What you'll find inside is a simple parallel assortment of R's, L's, & C's (resistance, inductance, capacitance) which are connected in *parallel* to the cable (nothing is in series with the signal other than wire itself). Their purpose is to absorb any reflected energy (for example, reflected power coming out of a speaker & reflecting back toward the amp) due to impedance mismatch or counter-emf. Componentry which exhibits a less-than-optimal match between the source, the cable, & the load would benefit more from this design approach than that with a better matchup would benefit. Therefor the sonic results vary according to the users' application. In my own experience, the results are significantly superior to some other approaches which I've tried.
The above post is a HORRIBLE surgery of Transparent cable!!!
Bob, from what I have seen you are mistaken. Transparent does install an inductor in series with the signal wire on all their cables. They must do this so they do not infringe on patents held by MIT.
My final contribution to this thread
Rex, what are you worried about if they can't??
Bob: I'm glad to see you back "amongst the living". Then again, maybe you were enjoying a better life before you fell back into this trap??? : )

As far as networks "absorbing reflected energy", that is impossible. The cable itself would have to have some type of directional coupler that would be wired in series with the signal for them to be trying to accomplish that. Other than that, i've never pulled these cables apart, so i have no idea as to what is inside of those little magic boxes. I have been told that it is nothing more than a "fancy" Zobel network, but i'm only repeating this as hear-say, not as a verifiable fact. Sean
all I can say: talk to Bruce Brisson at MIT like I did