New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

World's Best IC for $130 or less - Page 5

post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by KR...
Hopefully this thread can be helpful not only to me but also to everyone else looking for great IC's for a reasonable price.
Why not spend just $65 more and get the Cardas Neutral Reference? There are LOTS of them around for $195 shipping included. This cable is EXACTLY what its name says: "Neutral" and "Reference."

Disclaimer: I do not believe in using cables as tone controls.
post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonkeyMan
Why not spend just $65 more and get the Cardas Neutral Reference? There are LOTS of them around for $195 shipping included. This cable is EXACTLY what its name says: "Neutral" and "Reference."

Disclaimer: I do not believe in using cables as tone controls.
I picked up a pair of Cardas Neutral reference for $200 on audigon after reading this thread, since i did need a fancy IC for my HE60's+cd-25. So far, so good.
post #63 of 82
Bought Elnero's Active Golds! Hope they will be amazing.

Can anyone tell me how the Aural Thrills Beryllium Copper compares to the Audiogeek Nitrogen?

How do they compare to each other? Is one better? Also, is $175 too high a price to pay for an Aural Thrills Beryllium Copper or is that a fair price?

A pair is available on Audiogon and I'm thinking about it but not sure yet.

Thanks.
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by pigmode
I havn't made direct comparisons but my experience with 89259 is they are not even in the same league as Grovers. Just go with Grovers--why take a chance?
Why take a chance? Well, piggie and Biggie, that's why I'm asking you guys, so I don't have to take that chance

Lots of IC's that get rave reviews are rebadged Belden or Canare cables. For example, some people mentioned the SignalCable Analog Two, which is a thinly disguised 89259, and the highly praised nitrogens are based on yet another cable TV coax. I wouldn't be surprised if one of those Belden coax based designs could take on one of the big guys and win.

For the price, an 89259 based Heartland cable / Bluejeans cable / SignalCable / Copycat cables / DIYaudio IC for $40-50 is an undeniable value compared to all that Monster and Audioquest crap. I'm trying to find out whether tripling the price (for the Grover SRII, for example) is worth the scratch. From both of your comments, it seems like it is. I was hoping that more people had tried the famous 89259 against some big name cables.

Just to give you an idea where I am coming from, I just spent $229 on a Zu Mobius cable, and while I admit that it has made a noticeable improvement to the sound, I really don't feel that it was worth $229... if only there was as much of a 89259/DIY type market for headphone cables! (I know, headphile offers something around $130, but there isn't much selection being the only "DIY cottage industry" offering, and I was looking for something under $100)
post #65 of 82
Just for a fyi, I mixed in a 89259 cable (made with good Cardas connectors) in with a bunch of ~$250 cables I was demoing. The 89259 cable was not in shame in this company. Yes, it is not the best in all areas and may not push everyones buttons, but there it was sounding quite well in this company. For under $100, this is definately worth a listen. I would recommend the Cardas ends (DIYCable.com or Element Cable) - some may say Bullets, but I haven't heard them.
post #66 of 82
I thought the 89259 w/ cardas slvr connectors sounded about 80-90% as good as cardas neutral refs. CNR's highs were the main difference I found. The 3 cables I mentioned earlier in the thread easily surpass either cable.

Biggie.
post #67 of 82
FYI Guys, I'm going to be auditioning 2 pairs of newcommer cables with a lot of potential: one of which will fall into this price point and expededly make a big splash.

I'll keep you guys posted.
post #68 of 82
I recently got some new Grover Ultimate Reference Cables and they are hands down the best cables I've ever listened (or should I say not listened) to. Extremely neutral, extremely clean. They're ugly as sin but extremely flexible and the sound is fantastic.
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_dawg
the highly praised nitrogens are based on yet another cable TV coax
Please give more details. Did you cut a Nitrogen cable yourself, or is it just a guess based on the stiffness of the Nitrogens?
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhorn
Please give more details. Did you cut a Nitrogen cable yourself, or is it just a guess based on the stiffness of the Nitrogens?
It is an educated guess. Think of the stiffness, the thickness, and take a look at Eric's webpage. All the specs smack of microwave or broadcast CATV coax cable. No way you can get the precision impedance, 88% propagation velocity, and full shielding without using that type of coax that is designed specifically with regard to transmission line principles and high frequency signal integrity. And besides, why else would Eric blather on about microwave design and show off his TDR scope? He certainly ain't using twisted pair CAT5.
post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_dawg
Why take a chance? Well, piggie and Biggie, that's why I'm asking you guys, so I don't have to take that chance

Lots of IC's that get rave reviews are rebadged Belden or Canare cables. For example, some people mentioned the SignalCable Analog Two, which is a thinly disguised 89259, and the highly praised nitrogens are based on yet another cable TV coax. I wouldn't be surprised if one of those Belden coax based designs could take on one of the big guys and win.
Belden coax is good stuff, especially for the <$100 range.

That said, the Nitrogens (which I manufacture) are NOT "cable TV coax!" Cable TV coax is either RG58 (mostly for short-run use) or solid-shield (read: encased in aluminum tube and nearly impossible to bend) long haul stuff. The Nitrogens use microwave-optimized low-loss RF cable that you might find on an antenna mast somewhere -- but I rather doubt it would come with your cable-TV set top box.
post #72 of 82
Indeed, Eric. No, you misunderstood me. Or perhaps I am using the wrong terminology. I did mean microwave / broadcast CATV cable as in the stuff they would use to send gigabytes of video data in the gigahertz frequency range between network stations, satellite towers, etc. Not home-use RG-6 or RG-59 crap.
post #73 of 82
... should clarify that my point was that there are many well-regarded cables that use standard bulk coax cable, including the Nitrogens, which, while they don't use the standard home-use coax, they do use (microwave quality) bulk coax, not some esoteric hyper-litz OFC 99.99999999% copper-silver-gold tri-alloy quad field geometry golden ratio spiritual guru blessed design selling for $800 a pair. You can have a good sounding cable based on bulk coax!
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_dawg
You can have a good sounding cable based on bulk coax!

Yep.

(Admittedly, the ProSink helps a lot. The raw Nitrogen stock sounds very unnatural without it; to the point that I initially rejected it out of hand and went with stiffer stuff for the Halogens. [this was before ProSink] The sheer volume of complaints regarding the ultra-stiff Halogens led me to reconsider the Nitrogen stock for my next cable, where I discovered that the ProSink makes the stuff sound seriously sweet! )
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_dawg
...they do use (microwave quality) bulk coax, not some esoteric hyper-litz OFC 99.99999999% copper-silver-gold tri-alloy quad field geometry golden ratio spiritual guru blessed design selling for $800 a pair.\
Don't worry, E-H-L-O-C-S-G-T-A-Q-F-G-R-S-G-B-D-$800 cable addicts, if there's a way to make or buy 'guru' cable with a constant impedance, I'll find it and sell it for $750 a pair
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: