Transparent MM2

I had no idea about the MM2 until my dealer sent out a note to his customers about Transparent coming out to demonstrate the difference.

So the setup used was Wilson Sophia 2, Rowland 250 monoblocks Ayre Preamp and Ayre CD player, Transparent Power conditioner (lowest model).

We listened to some music with all Ultra with MM technology (Speaker cable, and two balanced runs), and then he switched out the Ultra MM with Ultra MM2 for all cables and we listened again.

Wow, the noise floor dropped so much I heard the artist wrap his knuckles on the body of the acoustic guitar and I didn't hear that at all with the Ultra mm before.
But what was amazing is how the grain (which I didn't notice before until I heard the newer version) in vocals disappeared and also developed more air around the performer (something that my higher end Reference Level cables did way better than Ultra) you hear him change sides on the microphone while singing. I was stunned by the upgrade especially for the lower level Transparent.

I thought the original from XL to MM technology made the transparent cables more natural versus the dynamic. That was a pretty huge jump in musicality, where ultra with MM was now basically better than Reference with XL cabling. I wouldn't say this is huge leap in that way but more of a refinement...

I can't wait to hear the improvements to Reference with MM cables which I want to upgrade to next.

Less than 30 days ago I bought transparent The Link MM version. I saw that they came out with the MM2 and was lucky enough to trade in the originals for the MM2s at no additional costs. While I was never able to do an A to B comparision I do think I can tell a difference even though the new cables are not yet "broken in".
I recently went to an event with a Transparent demonstration. They not only sent out sales people but engineers as well. I was really impressed with their presentation. They claim that the new MM2 is like moving 1.5 steps up which is beleivable, but again without an A to B comparision its impossible to tell.
On the other hand I would not go out and replace MM1 with MM2 cables of the same type. I would think that money would be better spent on some other equipment.

i have just completed an audition of the ultra MM2 IC in my system [baseline cables: all ref mm1 SC and ics, latest xl pc's] . an a/b/c/d comparison in the source to preamp position against the following TA mm1 ICs: ultra, ref, and refXL. i will post an extensive review in the review section of this site by next week. the audition process was as thorough as my previous review of 2 preamps: vtl 6.5 vs arc ref 3 on this site [posted in 07] . cheers.

Soundisntmusic, I really look forward to your review. I am partly excited about the potential of MM2 technology and partly annoyed that my less than one year old Ref XL cables "need" a $10,000 update to stay current.

I am so far inclined to take Tmcginn's advice and invest in other equipment.
Unless your review convinces me to try and get my hands on some Ref XL/MM2 cables to audition which has been difficult as yet.

Thanks in advance for your effort.

khrys: unfortunately, i was unable to get my hands on a high end TA IC with mm2 to audition (such as TA ref+mm2, ref XL +mm2) . my review is based upon comparing the new mm2 technology on an ultra IC in an a/b/c/d of ic's with orig mm tech of ultra, ref, and ref xl (which you have) . i hope it will be enlightening nonetheless. that said, in about 2 weeks i should be able to review thouroughly TA ref mm2 against the ref XL (orig mm) and possibly the TA refMM (orig tech) if i dare borrow one from my wonderful dealer.

why, you may ask, do i need to wait about 2 weeks to audition the ref mm2? because that is about the time my ref cables will be back from TA with the mm2. did i just let the cat out of the bag? the mm2 tech pushed most all aspects of the ultra's sound presentation above the ref level. the mm2 tech moved the ultra into the sound presentaiton of the ref XL, where it has never been. (btw, IMO the ref+mm orig was never in the sound world of the ref XL+mm orig in terms of nuance, timbral detail, micro dynamics, transient clarity etc. in most respects, the ref has been the big brother of the ultra, not the little brother of the ref xl.) with the mm2 tech, in most aspects, the ultra mm2 sounds as if is the ref XL's (orig mm) little brother, so to speak. now dont jump on me. there are a few aspects of the ultra mm2 that did not leap upward to the next level... stay tuned for the details.

during my audition, i have attempted to evaluate several aspects of sound presentation (across a diverse range of classical music ) whose sole purpose ultimately is to reveal the performers' most personal communication of their musical experience while bringing a score to life.... interpretation. of course, audiogoners want concrete details, so i specifically noted comparisons of the physical aspects of sound presentation (transient speed, decay, timbral nuance, mirco dynamics) which musicians discuss in terms of articulation, release, tone color, intensity, dynamic modulations.. all at the service of phrasing etc. . LOL

IF ref+mm(orig) and refXL+mm(orig) enjoy a similar or nearly similar metamorphosis with the MM2 tech in most aspecs for which we listen as a complete musical experience, ,well, that will be most outstanding! this is something i cannot comment upon at this time as i have no ref XL+mm2 to audition. i would conject (always dangerous) that the higher up you go in terms of cable quality, the less substantial the improvements may be realized. cheers, marc