New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Got my Grover UR5s - Page 5

post #61 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
...perhaps MonkeyMan can comment further?
A friend of mine who is in the music business was in town recently with his band for a concert on their current tour. I mentioned the cables to him, and he insisted on coming over with his sound technician while his crew was "loading-in" band equipment at the venue.

I'm always glad to see an old friend, but I wasn't quite sure what he had up his sleeve with the soundman tagging along. So they set up this fancy room acoustics analyzer system, which only took about ten minutes. Then the sound guy asked my friend and I to step out of the room with him. He had routed the cable from the microphone to a small road-case rack through an existing port in the wall. He had a recording of some test tones that he played in the dCS unit, which he controlled from outside the room with a remote.

He ran a test cycle three times with the Tara cables in place and three times with the UR-6. Then my friend and I hung out and listened to some studio rehearsal recordings he had brought along (wanted to turn me on to his new bass player). About fifteen minutes later sound guy shows us some graphs and a bunch of data that I do not understand; but in a nutshell he said that the room response was very good (which it should be since it was built for use as a home studio by the previous owner). He went on to show us how although the response curve was _almost_ flat with the Tara in place, it was noticeably closer to flat with the UR in place.

The whole affair lasted no more than an hour, and off to the show we all went (I caught a ride with them and took a taxi home). Their little test was so interesting! The concert was great too, though it started off a little rough for the first few tunes. In the end, an old friend really delivered a fun time for his fans, and that bass player really is a neat guy (can't remember his name). At times it seemed it was his goal to demolish the venue; the lowest notes were like thunder! Good thing I had my Ety earplugs in...

I hope this helps...
post #62 of 96
darkangel i agree about the u5 with rock recordings. the x-1 have been really great on instumental jazz, more fun than the grover u5, horns sound more articulate and more spacious, with slightly better seperation.
however with rock such as Tool the x-1 sound unlistenable in my system, whether its the recording or not is sort of besides the point b/c in contrast the u5 sound great on those same recordings.

i dont think the x-1 is as neutral or transparent as some are suggesting. im finding the midrange recessed and the highs and lows unnaturally bumped, a U shaped frequency curve. this is the possible explaination for the u5 having better vocal presence and tone even though overall the x-1 sound more present. i'd estimate the grovers more neutral throughout with a slight high frequency roll off.

with the x-1 the instruments sound infront of vocals. on u5 vocals are in front and details further behind... its like the x-1 are playing the music from an opposite perspective - background details are the closest point in space.
post #63 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenW
Gotcha both...I'm a child of the 8-track.
OK...there were two LPs that I willfully aquired as desired items way back in 1972 (?). A double LP Elvis Greatest Hits and The Osmonds-Homemade Disclosures indeed!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
I find analyzing/reviewing cables a labor and takes away from my real goal, music!
Oh yeah. I'd be OK with not mentioning X-1 or UR again for a good long while.
I was taking an internet break.
But out of respect here we go again...(one last time?).

Pride, Predjudice and Preference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by markl
Repeat after me-- "I am not my gear, I am not my gear..."
It seems many of us are guilty to some degree of idealizing the sounds of our systems when asked to publicly describe their qualities. (eyeteeth slowly raises hand with head hung a little, eyes averted, and sneaks a peek for other raised hands). They can become extensions of ourselves, reflections of ourselves, the sonic, or even for some aesthetic, attributes of a piece of audio hardware. We associate. Just as we may have difficulty in seeing ourselves very truthfully, something that varies greatly from individual to individual, truthfully describing a piece of gear may be less accurate than hoped for by others. Nearly everyone's latest whatever is seriously fantastic. It's human nature.
(Please pardon the didactic tone! ), (Also, not sure if Mark intended the meaning to be taken as far I as I took it ).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wodgy
(great Pavlovian marketing there, BTW).
Link
Witness the bell ring and the salivating on cue. It's also something like the gambler who is certain one more pull on the one-armed-bandit, who's jackpot keeps increasing, just may be the winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jp11801
Damn it damn it damn it, this sounds like the cable for me I went from the UR5 to the X-1 and now have some old as the hill transparent music link plus cables bit the UR6 sounds like a winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
Pulling out my notepad from previous cables/sessions I heard further improvements in detail resolution and soundstage presentation. I think ET should hear UR6 as I no longer will concede that X1 is slightly more detailed, I feel UR6 has matched it there and added to its advantage in soundstage presentaion which is really impressive now........perhaps MonkeyMan can comment further?

The tone balance is slightly different now, a bit less full and warm toned like UR5, it now has a faster more agile bounce to its step, a touch more treble energy and extension. If you made a hybrid of X1 and UR5 sounds the result would be UR6, as usual not sure what changes Grover has made to acheive this. Still has natural relaxed detailed presention that makes almost any type of music sound its best........I have many rock recordings with typical grain and glare sound and UR5/UR6 can play these more cleanly/smoothly than Oritek or Wolff, yet still magically match these great cables in detail resolution and soundstage, somehow it minimizes CD sound flaws best.

This is the quality that keeps me a Grover fan.......the universal ability to make any type of recording sound its best while minimizing its flaws. Vast majority of my music collection is your average rock recordings so my primary goal to to make these sound as good overall as possible.
I've heard UR2, 3, 4 & 5 and well I just don't believe the press anymore.
Um...OK...it could be true. Anything is possible. Do I dare miss out on the possibility?

I don't pay much heed to burn-in but I burned-in the UR5 for 200 hours! I distinctly remember my reaction to hearing them and saying to myself "hey! Very, very nice". I may have had lower expectations than were obviously justified. Very, very nice, refined also conventional sounding as in separation and soundstaging on par with other good cables.

My favourite Grover poster is Seagoat and my favourite post is this one. I love these quotes for the entertainment value:
"UR 5 - Unlike anything that has gone before" "The UR 5 is the first truly linear sounding cable." "This cable captures the best of all of Grover's prior cable and doubles, triples them." "as close to the master recording as possible without any highlight or defects in the sound." "There is no competition for sound this good." "They are that good!!!"

"Ladies and Gentlemen let's have a warm welcome for that latest music sensation...The Upgrades!"



"that good!!!"
Sheesh, that newish phrase has become very popular of late and is really ready for an early retirement; it's used in many reviews including our X-1/X-2 review. Yuck!


I find quite a gap between the written descriptions and the reality. Each new version is just divine. The description of pure perfection. Everything anyone could ever want in a cable. All signals that pass through shall be blessed and rendered whole again, Amen.
It'll only be with the arrival of the following upgrade that weakness' heard in the previous incarnation are admitted to: "UR 4 had really punchy bass and very sweet revealing highs but some covered mids; however, it was unbalanced sounding, not linear"

But my praise for the X-1 must look just as over the top to the Grover crew...maybe? For some time I was of the opinion that this was a problem in many cable reviews-hyperbole. I tried to avoid this, avoid use of the standard cliche's, jargon, wording, phrases, and descriptions that were often interchangeable between any two very good cables.

I don't know if I succeeded or not but I tried to keep it simple, keep it real. Focusing solely on what was apparent, detail, separation & imaging, a result, I thought, of greater transparency. I tried to remain relatable through the mention of specific music, which CD sounded like what, specifically how it changed before and after. A just-the-facts, down to Earth and not a pie-in-the-sky, creative writing depiction of a cable. Maybe I failed?

It's funny that over the past few weeks I'd received a number of emails and PMs from a variety of people from various forums, not related to cables but other components, and every person felt compelled to inform me of some small previously unknown company who's cable, preamp or whatever killed that of a well known expensive competitor! Insane.
I don't think I believe anyone I don't know well and I don't know why anyone would believe me either. I certainly don't believe the Grover group; but at least I have first hand experiences there.

So what's going on? Inadequate journalistic skills?
The excesses inherent to (irrational?) exuberance?
The same thing as what has someone declare Mr.X the greatest singer ever?
OK, I'm easy, I'll go with that.

Is any of this really very important?
No, not at all.

Writing is fun and I just felt like making a point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by euclid
darkangel i agree about the u5 with rock recordings. the x-1 have been really great on instumental jazz, more fun than the grover u5, horns sound more articulate and more spacious, with slightly better seperation.
however with rock such as Tool the x-1 sound unlistenable in my system,

with the x-1 the instruments sound infront of vocals. on u5 vocals are in front and details further behind...
Wow that's rather miraculous! A cable that can distinguish whether it's playing jazz or rock, vocals or instruments and be designed to present the information based on genre and type of instrument no less! Holy smoke! I had no idea this was possible. DarkAngel said it best "magically match". You're correct, you two are on the "same page"...but a page seemingly pulled from a Harry Potter book.

BTW Tool sounds fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
There has been some discussion here that the real goal of cables is to be completely transparant as possible to music signal, which sounds logical but in reality may not ultimately be satisfying for everyone.

I have local friends with 50K+ systems that sound great if you play the handful of acceptable audiophile CDs (Dianna Krall, Jennifer Warren, Ricky Lee Jones, etc) but put on "average" rock CD like Rolling Stones, AC/DC and it sounds terrible magnifying every small recording flaw, can't even make it through one song, painful experience........just an observation that ultimate resolution and transparancy may not be a satisfying goal for everyone
Maybe they should downgrade to better equipment?

A transparent cable (if there truly were such a thing) would have you hear a component's interpretation of the recorded media. A transparent cable would have nothing added, nothing subtracted. Don't like the sound? Blame the material, amp, source, transducers, room. Oh right, the Grover cables are able to distinguish between a CD's information, the difference between a virtue and a flaw. They're capable of supressing the high frequencies on a poorly mastered CD but let those frequencies shine through when a well mastered CD is detected. How come my Grovers were not, apparently, the greatest advance in the history of recorded music?

OK, back to reality:The same creativity used in describing the loftiness of one's own system does appear to get employed in describing the faults of other systems, with both accounts being something less than accurately portrayed.

What does transparency mean to me? Or rather, what is it I expect from transparency? What has been my experience so far with the relative degree of which I have so far? I don't own any "Dianna Krall, Jennifer Warren, Ricky Lee Jones" but DarkAngel and I have much in common as the
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
Vast majority of my music collection is your average rock recordings so my primary goal to to make these sound as good overall as possible.
It's hardly the horror of looking at what's next to you after a drunken one night stand, (not that I've done much of that ), that it is being mischaracterised as.

In my X-1 review I wrote of my rediscovery of The Verve's Urban Hymns, specifically of what I had always thought of to be a very sub-par sonic experience and it's significant elevation via an increase in system transparency. The Oritek X-1 was a great aid in achieving this increase. I honestly felt that my system had passed through a threshold and moved beyond ordinary transparency. It was like being able to see farther and more clearly in the dark. I had already been enjoying the pleasures of this path as DarkAngel may recall when I alone, in all I've ever read, declared black metal's Mayhem's De Mysteriis Dom Satanas CD not the miscreant recording everyone had described it as. Far from it, I can raise the roof with it painfree. Transparency allows this I believe.
Of course as a "grumbler" I do my fair share of complaining about the state of many masterings. Who doesn't? The whole raison d’être of the Steve Hoffman forum is the discussion of such.

My hope is to unlock as much musical enjoyment as possible; through transparency to dig up every ounce of bass information on a lean recording, every iota of musical value without creative editorial interpretation.

I occasionally pick up a CD as compensation for my darling who must hear so much of my music. As she is much more pop/radio oriented than I, I brought her Coldplay's X&Y a few days ago. I was well aware of but didn't know Coldplay at all. It was it's second spin on the following day that sucked me in. I quickly enjoyed this CD very much, especially tracks #5 and #7. From a sonic perspective the CD seems typical of modern "average rock recordings", close miked, dynamically compressed, the crescendo to climax of a chorus doesn't really increase in level but gets crowded instead. Did it detrack from my enjoyment? No. I must have looked like a monk in happy meditation such was my pleasure between the speakers. (I was lost in thoughts of how this sounded like an alternate universe U2 that had long before not taken the road of self-parody). Sure you hear the flaws but put them aside and bask in the flood of all the good stuff, the greater good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel
it sounds terrible magnifying every small recording flaw, can't even make it through one song, painful experience
Utter nonsense, based upon the sounds of transparency here. Maybe high resolution can be presented differently in different systems. The presentation here is just a little warm and laidback, full scale and rich with an abundance of texture, certainly nothing is thrown in your face. But all is most certainly present. Did the engineers intend for me to hear the big shift in miking (or whatever)/ lateral expansion at the 46 second mark of track #2? Don't know, don't care, it sounds cool to me.

I hope this corrects the false assertion that transparency is an obstacle to enjoyment. So far it has been my experience to be the most rewarding path.

Also it's not my intension to piss off my fellow members in this thread. I like my fellow members. We may have a big difference of opinion on this issue but surely we are on the same page with many other things, some much more important.

Now I think I can take my break.
post #64 of 96
Eyeteeth, great post.

It is somewhat humorous to see the flavor-of-the-month phenomenon on an accelerated scale here. UR4 is the best thing since sliced bread, until UR5 comes out, and then UR4 was "unbalanced sounding, not linear." Each time the descriptions get more and more effusive.

I'm not picking on Grover here. If you step back, as you've done in your post, and just think about all this, it's just so plainly nuts. This is audiophile neurosis writ large. It's just easier to see than usual because the upgrades are coming so fast, hot, and heavy. Cables make a difference, but the kinds of differences being described and fought over here are way beyond any possible reality. It's like the 6moons reviewer who recently described how flipping the fuse around in his CD player introduced so much "glare and brightness" it destroyed his enjoyment of the music. Really? It may make a difference, but to discern such huge, enjoyment-destroying differences by just flipping a fuse around says more about obsession and the psychological aspects of this hobby than the fuses or cables themselves.
post #65 of 96
Quote:
Maybe they should downgrade to better equipment?

A transparent cable (if there truly were such a thing) would have you hear a component's interpretation of the recorded media. A transparent cable would have nothing added, nothing subtracted. Don't like the sound? Blame the material, amp, source, transducers, room. Oh right, the Grover cables are able to distinguish between a CD's information, the difference between a virtue and a flaw. They're capable of supressing the high frequencies on a poorly mastered CD but let those frequencies shine through when a well mastered CD is detected. How come my Grovers were not, apparently, the greatest advance in the history of recorded music?
ET........why all the sarcasm towards Grover, and the subtle mocking of those who like his cables? Heed your title about "pride and prejudice" and accept the fact that people can come to different conclusions about which cable they prefer, there is no agenda/secret plot here to promote Grover cables.......just reporting what we hear.

And yes playing average rock CDs on a "downgraded" systems does sound better vs 50K system, transparancy and ultimate detail resolution is not my end goal, musical enjoyment is..... a balancing of many elements.
post #66 of 96
eyeteeth,

I enjoyed reading your post. As a reviewer myself, you raise up a lot of questions which have surrouned the reviewing business for awhile now, especially around cables.

All I can say is that a good well written review can at least give you another option for auditioning, but ultimately you need to hear something in your system with your ears before the final decision can be made. I think your review of the Oritek's was a great read and articulated quite nicely, enough to at least put the Oritek on my audition wish list. That is really all one can expect to get from a review, because I may not like it at all. But you got my interest piqued enough for an audition and I'll have to rely upon my ears from there - thanks for the heads up though
post #67 of 96
weird - double post
post #68 of 96
Quote:
(Please pardon the didactic tone! ), (Also, not sure if Mark intended the meaning to be taken as far I as I took it ).
LOL, well, with all due respect, I think you are demonstrating an over-attachment to the product you love.

Quote:
I've heard UR2, 3, 4 & 5 and well I just don't believe the press anymore.
LOL. Dude, I'm no different than you, nor is DA or anyone else. We're all hobbyists with a keyboard and an internet connection. There is no secret society or cabal or whatever you think out there pumping the Grover cables, getting secret millions in bribes for their "endorsement". Sometimes, and I know this is HARD to believe, but sometimes, when a product is really really good, a lot of people start to like it, they start to post about it on the internet. That's how legitimate "buzz" begins.

There is no "press" here on Head-Fi just a few people who (just like you) have posted their thoughts about a particular cable on a particular website.

I think you are taking it personally that not everyone who has heard the Oritek likes it as much as you. That doesn't mean they are "wrong" just that they have a different *opinion* than you. It's no big deal.

BTW, I'm not writing off the Oriteks, as I've said to you privately, I'd be glad to hear them (X-1 or X-2), and give my honest opinion on what I hear. If Ori wants to send a sample to me, all he has to do is PM me. My allegience is to good sound, not to any one cable builder. Right now, Michael Wolff happens to build the best cables I've heard, but before that, it was Grover, and before that, it was Virtual Dynamics.

Even though I have heard better with the Wolff cables, I still stand by the Grovers as an *absurd* bargain in their price range. All I can do is tell you or anyone else, if there is a "Grover conspiracy" on Head-Fi, they left me out. What's the secret handshake??????

Quote:
I don't know if I succeeded or not but I tried to keep it simple, keep it real. Focusing solely on what was apparent, detail, separation & imaging, a result, I thought, of greater transparency. I tried to remain relatable through the mention of specific music, which CD sounded like what, specifically how it changed before and after. A just-the-facts, down to Earth and not a pie-in-the-sky, creative writing depiction of a cable. Maybe I failed?
Oh, come on dude, why do I even have to type this? I know that you know yours is just one of a million possible opinions. And the evidence suggests that there are opinions against yours, so what?

Quote:
My hope is to unlock as much musical enjoyment as possible; through transparency to dig up every ounce of bass information on a lean recording, every iota of musical value without creative editorial interpretation.
As is that of other people without Oriteks in their signal path. Again, it's all subjective, I'm sorry you feel cheated or denied, but there are other people with other biases and other systems who feel differently than you.
post #69 of 96
this has gotten so out of hand.

the oritek are not perfect!

the grovers are not perfect!

Grover does admit weekness in his UR and is continually improving them.

Ori and EyeTeeth insist the x-1 have no weakness and will never need to be improved... yet there is a "better" x-2 at double the price.

WHO SHOULD BE GETTING MOCKED?
post #70 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by euclid

Ori and EyeTeeth insist the x-1 have no weakness and will never need to be improved... yet there is a "better" x-2 at double the price.

WHO SHOULD BE GETTING MOCKED?
Can't help but agree with this notion. A bit hypocritical to be slagging Grover for upgrading his cables when Oritek is doing the same thing with the X-2. And for those professional reviewers that have received the X-2...it's the same deal comparing it back to the X-1. It's divine. More transparent. Everything anyone could ever want in a cable. More better-er-est. etc etc etc. Again I apply to the notion that the X-1 is merely a good cable within it's price range. Clearly it's not some kind of be-all end-all cable if even Oritek himself feels he needs to/can make a better cable.
post #71 of 96
Thread Starter 
I'm not gonna be commenting on the UR5s afterall. I did enjoy them, but I'm now reseving judgement for the UR6s v. X-1s. I just got the UR6s yesterday, and am very, very impressed with them. The X-1s really wowed me, but something about them hasn't tickled me right over time. I actually have a second pair that should be arriving tomorrow though, so I'll comment when i can use one on source and one between pre and monos (I read comments on audioasylyum that that was the only fair way to evalute them).

first impressions with the U6s are really great. I had my girlfriend sit in my listening room to listen to them to see if she could tell a difference, left for a few minutes and when i came back her eyes were closed and she was rocking away and nodding the the tunes in my listening chair--something very uncharacteristic of her.

I'll comment more when I've spent some serious timewith them/when I don't have an Evidence final at 8:30am
post #72 of 96
Thread Starter 
delete me too
post #73 of 96
Thanks for the support Wodgy and recstar24
Notice how you both effortessly address the issue. Nail on the head.
While the others, offended, run around it and look for reasons why I could say what I have. Why?

Have I been sarcastic about Grover? No.
Have I been subtly mocking of listeners? No.
Have I ever even remotely hinted at some "endorsement" arrangement? No.
Have I ever implied perfection about any cable? No.

I suggest reading my post again. Or just reread Wodgy and recstar24's posts. They get it. Yes that was I who raised his hand at the start of my post. Why has no one else done so? "Pride, Predjudice and Preference?" included me.

Yes Vertigo-1 I guess it can look hypocritical. That's my fault. In still giving my opinion I look greatly engaged, it isn't clear that I'm about as interested in the Oritek as I am in the Grover. I'm not interested in either. It's there, set and forget. I've moved on except for these tying of loose ends.

I like Grover. I like his cables.
How many times must I say it?
Do I have to be ridiculous and do a "the first truly linear sounding cable" or "There is no competition for sound this good" to be anything but somehow insulting?


I think his supporters are doing him a diservice with impossibly high praise unmatched by any single product in the entire audio world. $60,000 speakers, $20,000 amplifiers, $10,000 cables, $20,000 turntables well they're each wonderful in so many ways, according to the reviews, but they're not perfect. They each do many but not every thing so very well.

Mark this is the second time you've raised and defended against an imagined agenda/secret plot/secret society/cabal/endorsement. DarkAngel's mention of the same is only the third time it's ever been mentioned that I've seen. I suggest you guys don't mention it again as it was never in my mind and it's still something I don't believe. Stop bringing it up.

Just don't have kung pow chicken when praising gear.

And DA, bad CDs do sound better on high-end gear, worse on mid-fi gear. You're mythologizing again.
post #74 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by euclid
Ori and EyeTeeth insist the x-1 have no weakness and will never need to be improved... yet there is a "better" x-2 at double the price.
I don't believe that Ori has said that the X-1 have no weaknesses. Just that the product is finished as is and he is moving on. The existence of the X-2 is proof enough that the X-1 is not the pinnacle of cable technology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertigo-1
A bit hypocritical to be slagging Grover for upgrading his cables when Oritek is doing the same thing with the X-2.
The X-2 is a completely different design from what I understand and takes significantly more time to produce. It is a separate and distinct product and not a different version of the same product.
post #75 of 96
Quote:
While the others, offended, run around it and look for reasons why I could say what I have. Why?
Oh, eyeteeth, you're super-freakin' out...

Quote:
I think his supporters are doing him a diservice with impossibly high praise unmatched by any single product in the entire audio world.
Well, I much prefer Michael Wolff's cable to any Grover I've heard so far. So, does that make a "Grover suporter"? Not so sure. All I can say is that, in the absence of Wolff's cables, Grover's cables are simply awesome. They are well worth the price in their category.

Quote:
Mark this is the second time you've raised and defended against an imagined agenda/secret plot/secret society/cabal/endorsement. DarkAngel's mention of the same is only the third time it's ever been mentioned that I've seen. I suggest you guys don't mention it again as it was never in my mind and it's still something I don't believe. Stop bringing it up.
LOL. Eyeteeth, all I can say is I'm not in league with DarkAngel (just ask him, no. really, ask him...), or any other Head-Fier.

I'm not here to support Grover against everyone. I don't believe Grover's cables are the best, period... I like Wolff's cables so far of what I've heard...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: