Transparent Ultra or Super?

I am wondering if anyone can help me decide if it is worth it to go straight to the Ultra XL cable from transparent audio, or start out with the Super XL. Price is not an issue here. I am curious if anyone has compared the two cables, and if so, what the differences are?

I have heard the Transparent music link plus cables, and they seem to have a bloated midrange "haze" in my opinion. Is this a trait of the Transparent line, or is it an interaction with my components?

I am running the following system:
Krell KAV 250CD
Krell pre-amp
Krell KSA 250 amplifier
Hales Revelation Three speakers
Audioquest Type 6+ speaker cables
Well Tempered Classic turntable
Benz Micro Glider 2 Cartridge
Acoustech PH-1P phono stage
Audioquest Ruby interconnects

Thanks in advance for any help!!

First of all - my experience has been that Transparent cables work best in an all-Transparent environment, rather than a mixed-brand environment. I don't think a mix of Transparent and Audioquest would sound good in your setup. I certainly did not care for such a combo in mine.

Secondly - I'm of the opinion that Transparent Super is the poorest value in the Transparent line. It's only marginally better than the Plus series, but is substantially more expensive. I would skip Super and go straight to Ultra.
I have had most of the transparent line in my system at one point or another and still have the Reference balanced and i use Super Bi-Wires for speaker cables,
You didnt meantion which you were interested and ive had many mixed pairs transparent/non-transparent in my system as well as i am sort of a cable junkie.

I dissagree slightly with Rex in that in my system AQ Python balanced wires sounded fantastic in my all transparent wired system.

In speaker cables i would have to say they are closer than i thought they would be as it was a money no object decision to keep the supers and not the ultras but there was better bass extension and a slightly darker background with the ultras but definately not significant and wayyy above the plus which i have also had in biwire.

In interconnects however the ultras were far superior to the supers in unbalanced

If youre doing balanced the only pairs i have had is super and Reference which of course, was no contest, however, AQ pythons were shockingly good wires
for the price in my system.

Hope this helps.
I agree with Rex, the line should really start with the ultra series, anything below that is not worth the money in my opinion.
There's no question Ultra XL has richer, fuller and nore extended harmonics than the Super XL.
Bloated midrange is certainly not a characteristic of Transparent cables.
Changing both interconnects and speaker cables will transform your system.
Are you buying new? The new MM network might change the story a bit for you. Supposedly the new MM Super would be equal to old XL Ultra. I do know that the MM Ultra IC I purchased was much better than the Super XL it replaced, but I do not have an Ultra XL to compare it too. Good luck.
'Tis a good point, No_money. My experience is that the Plus MM interconnects are better than the Super XL.
I am not considering buying new cables.

I think that the midrange bloat that I have been hearing is due to more of the music coming through and pointing out a poor room acoustic phenomena. I will try to pull the speakers out into the room and see if that clear up the sound.


are the new Plus MM's really better than the old super xl's? My dealer is telling me this, and I find it hard to believe.

rock on, brad
Buehrer - yes, they are. I've got both in my HT system, and the Plus MMs are more extended and more detailed than the Super XLs. I'm slowly migrating the Super XL out of the HT.
Rex, any experience with the new MM tech. speaker cables as compared to the XL? I have super XL and while they do offer an upgrade to Ultra MM it is still a bit much $$ for me at this time. I might sell this pair to go for Super mm though...

I've never had "XL" speaker cables. I had Transparent Super (the original) in the big system for my Maggies, upgraded to Ultra MM, then upgraded to Reference BiCable (MM) for the Vandersteens.

One thing to keep in mind is that "XL Technology" wasn't really technology in the form of circuitry or hardware; "XL Technology" came about because Transparent got some exotic test equipment to use with their high-end cable (which became "Reference XL," as opposed to the less-lofty "Reference with XL"). They started using the exotic test equipment on a big chunk of their cable line, improving tolerances and consistency. That's why the cables got the "XL" stamp.

MM is a true upgrade, in that it's an actual improvement in the design and materials.
I still havn't had time to pull the speakers out into the room, although they are about 54" from the wall now. I have had a chance to listen and compare the super to the ultra xl cables, and they are an immediate improvement.

What I am wondering, is the step up to reference going to be a similar jump in performance? I can audition them also from my local dealer if you say that would be worth doing.

thanks to everyone for the good advice.

Wait till you guys get a lift from listening to Gen5 generation of Transparent cables.


can you talk about the sonic improvement(s) of Gen5 vs. MM2 series?

Happy Listening!

I’ve had a lot of Transparent cables over the years, along with many others, so my experience is large.  Just got the Gen 5 Plus bi wires and Balanced Interconnects.  They are simply astounding cables by any measure.  So much unforced detail, dynamics and physicality to the sound.  Superb texture and nuance with accurate tone as well.  They equal my mm2 Ultra cables.
Q, is Gen 5 same version as MM2 or Gen 5 is Transparent's newer and the latest?
Gen 5 is a significant redesign of cable and networks.