BEST TONEARM CABLE PURIST VENUSTUS GRAHAM IC 70


HAS ANYBODY COMPARED PURIST VENUSTAS TO GRAHAM IC 70 TO HOVLAND MUSIC GROOVE 2 TO NORDOST TYr ETC I HAVE GRAHAM 2.2 TONEARM..
ebm
Nsgarsh,yes it was broken in.Also,the first comparison was with no changes,for voicing.Also,it was Jim Aud who added the right angle connector,so I assume he knew what he was doing.Do you still feel that I would benefit by not having this connection path?I could probably get away with the straight one,but is it a technically better way to go?And,why didn't Purist Audio recommend my pal NOT get the ninety degree connection,if it was not as effective?

You know I trust in your comments,so any afterthoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks.
Great information, I am using a XLO Signature for my Graham and I am interested in these results. I think, the most critical part is the airy high frequency area. May I ask for the used Phono Stage ?
Speedy,

Either DIN termination is electrically identical. The choice of rt. angle vs. straight DIN connector is purely a function of your tonearm configuration and/or how the cable has to exit the turntable itself -- as you indicated ("the ninety degree(right angle) connectors did NOT allow the cabling to go straight down") I was simply referring to the extra set of contacts brought into the picture when you had to add the Cardas rt. angle adaptor to the mix. So if you do decide to buy a Venustas, just make sure you specify you want it with a straight DIN connector, that's all. I can't imagine Jim A. recommending someone not get the straight DIN if that's what would work best in your setup. Does the Graham receptacle point straight down, or to the side?
Oh,I forgot to mention what could probably be a salient point.My friend,Sid,who has WAY more experience,and knowledge than anyone I've ever met,in this hobby,brought up the point that when there is less bass present,there is always the perception of greater high freq extension.I don't know for sure,but I'd hate to attribute the slightly more enhanced high freq performance of the Veustas(GOD it WAS gorgeous,though) to the slightly lower bass impact,it had compared to the IC-70.BTW both cables were STUNNING overall and I'm splitting hairs,yet there seemed to be real silky beauty derived from the Venustas,and Big Boy bass bloom from the IC-70,with a definitely wider stage presentation.I could happily live with either,yet when I factor in that I've got to spend about 7-8 hundred bucks,out of pocket if I go for the Venustas(taking into account what I'd get for the IC-70),I have to wonder,based on how critical the cart/arm voicing was,and how it impacted overall performance(AFTER the original NO CHANGES comparison(which was closer than you'd think),whether the money would be better spent in going to the SUPERB Winds guage instead.My current guage is accurate to 50/100's of a gram,and we do tune by ear,after a point.However once we found the EXACT downforce,the 1/100 of a gram Winds guage proved indispensable!HMM!My pal Sid felt this was as valid an expenditure as moving to the Venustas.Actually he felt it was the fine tuning of the arm/cart that was the "end all" here,and the "cable thing" was audible,yet of
little consequence as compared to the differences attributable to the voicing of arm/cart.I am still in the dark,as to how I feel about the whole issue,but it's my dough,I'll be spending!

"What, O What to DO"!!
Speedy,

If everything's right with the arm/tt setup, then the Venustas should give you flat response top to bottom. If it doesn't, then it may be you need to adjust the cartridge loading in the phono preamp to a slightly lower value, to compensate for that extra DIN connector which is adding resistance (and unductance, which sucks up bass) that the Graham doesn't have to contend with. (That's why I said using the adaptor wouldn't give a true comparison)

Try using the Venustas without the extra DIN. Throw a loop in the pigtail (so it won't affect the suspension) and secure the outgoing side of the loop to the TT base with a nylon cord clamp secured to the bottom back edge of the base.