Neruda
Banned Moderator
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
- Posts
- 3,216
- Likes
- 11
whatever you want, they're your ears and it's your money...
Why did you take the Equinox over the Cardas or vice versa?
- Thread starter The Quality Guru
- Start date
Dusty Chalk
Head-Fi-holic: With headphones would just be a benny.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2001
- Posts
- 6,565
- Likes
- 15
I have all three (Clou Blue, Cardas, StefanArt). The short answer is, I haven't decided yet. All three are a significant (nee, mandatory) improvement over the stock cable.
I've had the Clou Blue the longest of the three, so it's being the most unused. I've been using the Cardas the most of the latter two, because it has a 1/4" plug. The StefanArt has an adapter, but there's something wrong with it, so I've only been using it with one amp that happens to have a 1/8" jack. It's really a no-lose situation -- they are all quite good, so if you're cheap, just get the cheapest one; if you don't want to end up double-thinking yourself later, get the most expensive one.
I've had the Clou Blue the longest of the three, so it's being the most unused. I've been using the Cardas the most of the latter two, because it has a 1/4" plug. The StefanArt has an adapter, but there's something wrong with it, so I've only been using it with one amp that happens to have a 1/8" jack. It's really a no-lose situation -- they are all quite good, so if you're cheap, just get the cheapest one; if you don't want to end up double-thinking yourself later, get the most expensive one.
dgs
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Posts
- 314
- Likes
- 10
Luke,
I chose the Equinox for a few reasons:
1. I listen to alot of jazz and old classical recordings. Jude felt that the Equinox was a little more forgiving on these recordings than the Cardas.
2. The Equinox, I thought, might clean up the treble and "lift the veil" from the senn580 without adding too much brightness. I have been pleased in this regard, although I do wonder whether the increased extension of the Cardas would not be welcome at times...
3. The guys at Stefan's were great with me.
4. I didn't want a fatiguing result from my $200 cable upgrade. I was concerned that the Cardas might be fatiguing given its description. On the other hand, I love my etymotic 4s, and I wonder if the Cardas might not provide that kind of detail. The Equinox is a huge improvement over the stock cable, but I wonder...
I will say that I have been very pleased with my Equinox cable. I have put in about 100 hours with it, and it just sounds very open and revealing. I don't get the feeling that it is altering the sound of my 580s so much as letting the signal get to them. But the veil that typically sits on the 580s has been lifted. If you intend to use the cable with 600s (which seem to have a bit more treble extension than the 580s), I'd suggest that the Equinox might fit the bill perfectly.
But just like Jude said, it really comes down to application and preference: if you are a "detailist," and nothing short of every detail is your game, the Cardas might fit you better. If you are a "musicalist," and prefer a warmer, more musical presentation, then the Equinox might suit you better. I put myself more toward the detailist side on most things, but I wanted to be able to enjoy all my old jazz recordings with my 580s, so I went with the Equinox. That's not to say that I might not get the Cardas someday...We'll see.
Happy shopping. I'm sure either will be a huge, pleasing improvement for you.
I chose the Equinox for a few reasons:
1. I listen to alot of jazz and old classical recordings. Jude felt that the Equinox was a little more forgiving on these recordings than the Cardas.
2. The Equinox, I thought, might clean up the treble and "lift the veil" from the senn580 without adding too much brightness. I have been pleased in this regard, although I do wonder whether the increased extension of the Cardas would not be welcome at times...
3. The guys at Stefan's were great with me.
4. I didn't want a fatiguing result from my $200 cable upgrade. I was concerned that the Cardas might be fatiguing given its description. On the other hand, I love my etymotic 4s, and I wonder if the Cardas might not provide that kind of detail. The Equinox is a huge improvement over the stock cable, but I wonder...
I will say that I have been very pleased with my Equinox cable. I have put in about 100 hours with it, and it just sounds very open and revealing. I don't get the feeling that it is altering the sound of my 580s so much as letting the signal get to them. But the veil that typically sits on the 580s has been lifted. If you intend to use the cable with 600s (which seem to have a bit more treble extension than the 580s), I'd suggest that the Equinox might fit the bill perfectly.
But just like Jude said, it really comes down to application and preference: if you are a "detailist," and nothing short of every detail is your game, the Cardas might fit you better. If you are a "musicalist," and prefer a warmer, more musical presentation, then the Equinox might suit you better. I put myself more toward the detailist side on most things, but I wanted to be able to enjoy all my old jazz recordings with my 580s, so I went with the Equinox. That's not to say that I might not get the Cardas someday...We'll see.
Happy shopping. I'm sure either will be a huge, pleasing improvement for you.
Neruda
Banned Moderator
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
- Posts
- 3,216
- Likes
- 11
I still wonder why people associate "warm" with "musical." Why can't accurate be musical?
fiddler
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2001
- Posts
- 1,930
- Likes
- 30
I still wonder why people associate any type of tonal quality of audio equipment with the term "musical".
dgs
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Posts
- 314
- Likes
- 10
Jeez guys, take a deep breath, it will be okay...I was just trying to convey my experience with the cable to help the guy out…
Neruda: Although it is true that something can sound both accurate and musical, it is not true that accurate is the opposite of warm. I don't remember stating that warm meant muddy or inaccurate. Those are your words. For example, the etymotic 4s presents music very accurately and very musically. These are not mutually exclusive terms. Hence, the comma between the two words in my sentence to which you refer. I wrote, "a warmer, more musical presentation," using two adjectives to describe a presentation...if they meant the same thing, I could have just used one. But rather, I find that both words describe music with the Equinox. Hmmm...Perhaps a quote from you will help, from your review of the 401,
"Sometimes though, I prefer the warmer sound. It can be very musical, perhaps a bit like a tube amp’s warmth. I usually prefer that sound with laid-back music late at night. It’s the sort of sound you can really get pulled into. Like I’ve mentioned once or twice already, the K401’s treble is smooth, yet detailed."
It doesn't seem that you are confused here, yet you use the terms “musical,” “warm,” and “detailed” in a description of the 401. Your complaint with my word-usage doesn’t seem any clearer to me after reading your words.
…
Fiddler: I understand your upset with the term "musical" being used to describe equipment. As we can see from your previous posts on the subject,
"Nope, my Corda ain't musical either. NO amp or headphone or speaker or CD player or turntable in the world is musical! Musicality requires HEART AND SOUL! These are machines we're talking about, people! If you're listening and you feel that it sounds "musical", give credit to the musician, not the equipment!"
or here,
"I also find the term "musical" very annoying... Whether something sounds musical or not is up to the MUSICIAN, not the equipment! No matter how great your headphones are, if you're listening to a bad musician, it's NOT GOING TO SOUND MUSICAL! What I mean by a "musical" musician is somebody who has the ability to move their audience to tears through the emotions they transmit through their music. No headphone in the world is going to convey emotion if there wasn't any emotion to begin with in the music! On the other hand, a recording of an incredibly gifted musician played through a pair of crappy headphones is STILL going to have the ability to move people, and therefore it is "musical"!"
But I'm afraid that I did not describe any piece of equipment as musical. Rather, I described the presentation, not the equipment itself as musical. Although I concede that musicality ultimately resides in the musician (as a professional musician of over 20 years, I believe that I understand musicality, and how it is conveyed), I find that certain types of equipment can either hinder or assist in the delivery of that musicality. A piece of equipment that does not adequately capture the timbre or tonal characteristics of a sound or group of sounds, produced by a musician, intended to evoke an emotion or association, to me, is not particularly musical. On the other hand, a piece of equipment that allows the full intentions of the musician to come through is musical. You can disagree with the word, but I think that the concept stands testing. Also, I did not associate a "tonal quality” of “audio equipment” with the “term musical”. Please re-read.
Finally, I will avoid delving into the imprecise usage of the words “heart” and “soul,” in the quote from you above, where you clearly suggest that musicality comes from the heart. Actually, the heart is an organ of specialized muscle tissue that has unique properties in that it controls its own cellular firing, can accept and adapt to the influence of multiple neuroendocrine substances, and pumps blood through the body from early in gestation until death without ever resting. However, it is not musical, nor does the heart, in and of itself, somehow endow a musician with musicality. I would be willing to wager that musicality is made up of more than just having a heart inside one’s body. We will leave “soul” for another time, perhaps. But clearly, you meant something by using these words, and although your usage might not be exactly precise (allowing someone to take you literally and then be offended by your suggestion), we all seem to know pretty much what you mean…
I am hoping that this is taken somewhat tongue in cheek. I agree that people throw words around and might not use them to your liking, but I also know that we economize on our delivery by allowing words to have connotations (what words imply) as well as denotations (what words actually say). So, I’m sorry if I somehow offended you by saying that a certain sound presentation was musical, but (1) just because your definition of a word does not exactly coincide with mine does not make yours right and mine wrong, and (2) I am relying on a history of common usage for this word that precedes your outrage.
You are both very bright guys, and I enjoy reading your posts all the time—very knowledgeable—but I do find it somewhat humorous that I have been playing music professionally since before either of you were born, only to be slapped on the wrist for what you consider imprecise usage of the word musicality (never mind that I was an English teacher for years)…it seems a bit silly to me that one should be held up to such exacting scrutiny on such trifles.
Neruda: Although it is true that something can sound both accurate and musical, it is not true that accurate is the opposite of warm. I don't remember stating that warm meant muddy or inaccurate. Those are your words. For example, the etymotic 4s presents music very accurately and very musically. These are not mutually exclusive terms. Hence, the comma between the two words in my sentence to which you refer. I wrote, "a warmer, more musical presentation," using two adjectives to describe a presentation...if they meant the same thing, I could have just used one. But rather, I find that both words describe music with the Equinox. Hmmm...Perhaps a quote from you will help, from your review of the 401,
"Sometimes though, I prefer the warmer sound. It can be very musical, perhaps a bit like a tube amp’s warmth. I usually prefer that sound with laid-back music late at night. It’s the sort of sound you can really get pulled into. Like I’ve mentioned once or twice already, the K401’s treble is smooth, yet detailed."
It doesn't seem that you are confused here, yet you use the terms “musical,” “warm,” and “detailed” in a description of the 401. Your complaint with my word-usage doesn’t seem any clearer to me after reading your words.
…
Fiddler: I understand your upset with the term "musical" being used to describe equipment. As we can see from your previous posts on the subject,
"Nope, my Corda ain't musical either. NO amp or headphone or speaker or CD player or turntable in the world is musical! Musicality requires HEART AND SOUL! These are machines we're talking about, people! If you're listening and you feel that it sounds "musical", give credit to the musician, not the equipment!"
or here,
"I also find the term "musical" very annoying... Whether something sounds musical or not is up to the MUSICIAN, not the equipment! No matter how great your headphones are, if you're listening to a bad musician, it's NOT GOING TO SOUND MUSICAL! What I mean by a "musical" musician is somebody who has the ability to move their audience to tears through the emotions they transmit through their music. No headphone in the world is going to convey emotion if there wasn't any emotion to begin with in the music! On the other hand, a recording of an incredibly gifted musician played through a pair of crappy headphones is STILL going to have the ability to move people, and therefore it is "musical"!"
But I'm afraid that I did not describe any piece of equipment as musical. Rather, I described the presentation, not the equipment itself as musical. Although I concede that musicality ultimately resides in the musician (as a professional musician of over 20 years, I believe that I understand musicality, and how it is conveyed), I find that certain types of equipment can either hinder or assist in the delivery of that musicality. A piece of equipment that does not adequately capture the timbre or tonal characteristics of a sound or group of sounds, produced by a musician, intended to evoke an emotion or association, to me, is not particularly musical. On the other hand, a piece of equipment that allows the full intentions of the musician to come through is musical. You can disagree with the word, but I think that the concept stands testing. Also, I did not associate a "tonal quality” of “audio equipment” with the “term musical”. Please re-read.
Finally, I will avoid delving into the imprecise usage of the words “heart” and “soul,” in the quote from you above, where you clearly suggest that musicality comes from the heart. Actually, the heart is an organ of specialized muscle tissue that has unique properties in that it controls its own cellular firing, can accept and adapt to the influence of multiple neuroendocrine substances, and pumps blood through the body from early in gestation until death without ever resting. However, it is not musical, nor does the heart, in and of itself, somehow endow a musician with musicality. I would be willing to wager that musicality is made up of more than just having a heart inside one’s body. We will leave “soul” for another time, perhaps. But clearly, you meant something by using these words, and although your usage might not be exactly precise (allowing someone to take you literally and then be offended by your suggestion), we all seem to know pretty much what you mean…
I am hoping that this is taken somewhat tongue in cheek. I agree that people throw words around and might not use them to your liking, but I also know that we economize on our delivery by allowing words to have connotations (what words imply) as well as denotations (what words actually say). So, I’m sorry if I somehow offended you by saying that a certain sound presentation was musical, but (1) just because your definition of a word does not exactly coincide with mine does not make yours right and mine wrong, and (2) I am relying on a history of common usage for this word that precedes your outrage.
You are both very bright guys, and I enjoy reading your posts all the time—very knowledgeable—but I do find it somewhat humorous that I have been playing music professionally since before either of you were born, only to be slapped on the wrist for what you consider imprecise usage of the word musicality (never mind that I was an English teacher for years)…it seems a bit silly to me that one should be held up to such exacting scrutiny on such trifles.
arrowmark
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2001
- Posts
- 323
- Likes
- 34
I chose the Equinox and have listened to all 3 of them.The Cloucable is much better than the stock cable but has a splashy unrefined treble.The Cardas was excellent, but I had connector problems with it so I returned it. The Equinox has a huge 3-D soundstage with a balanced frequency response.PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!
kelly
Herr Babelfish der Übersetzer, he wore a whipped-cream-covered tutu for this title.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2002
- Posts
- 5,435
- Likes
- 12
Quote:
I'm quoting Nick because his opinion most closely echoes my own even though there's a different twist.
I think Nick's right in saying that the Clou Blue and Equinox are closer to the original sound of the HD600. The only thing I'll add to that is that it does overall "darken" the lower octaves. This helps the bass get a little better extension but makes the bumped midbass even more noticable.
The Cardas cable really has more of an effect on the headphone (for better or worse). It seems to bring out more in the upper-mids which is, in my view, where the HD600 needs a little help. This keeps the soundstage from sounding quite so recessed. The Cardas sounds more articulate of the two and that characteristic follows down into the bass region. This doesn't completely solve the bass hump I mentioned above but it seems to make it more managed and controlled.
It doesn't surprise me that people aren't agreeing on this issue and I think the gist fo it as what Nick said: if you like the HD600 the way it is but want it "better", go with the Equinox. If you think the HD600 has some trouble spots that could use some attention, get the Cardas. I prefer both to the stock cable and Clous.
| Originally posted by Nick Dangerous I think the Clou extends the capabilities of the Senns without changing it... whereas the Equinox goes even further toward perfection. The Cardas sounds great, but it does seem to change the basic nature of the Sennheisers. Hey! If I wanted a different headphone, I'd buy one. I'm one of the few people who prefers the Clou to the Cardas because I like that "Sennheiser sound". Different strokes... |
I'm quoting Nick because his opinion most closely echoes my own even though there's a different twist.
I think Nick's right in saying that the Clou Blue and Equinox are closer to the original sound of the HD600. The only thing I'll add to that is that it does overall "darken" the lower octaves. This helps the bass get a little better extension but makes the bumped midbass even more noticable.
The Cardas cable really has more of an effect on the headphone (for better or worse). It seems to bring out more in the upper-mids which is, in my view, where the HD600 needs a little help. This keeps the soundstage from sounding quite so recessed. The Cardas sounds more articulate of the two and that characteristic follows down into the bass region. This doesn't completely solve the bass hump I mentioned above but it seems to make it more managed and controlled.
It doesn't surprise me that people aren't agreeing on this issue and I think the gist fo it as what Nick said: if you like the HD600 the way it is but want it "better", go with the Equinox. If you think the HD600 has some trouble spots that could use some attention, get the Cardas. I prefer both to the stock cable and Clous.
MacDEF
Headphone Hussy (will wear anything if it sounds good)
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2001
- Posts
- 6,761
- Likes
- 13
What Kelly said
(Well put, Kelly; I feel the same.)
(Well put, Kelly; I feel the same.)
Daemoth
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Posts
- 298
- Likes
- 0
Kelly,
I'm looking to get the cardas cable but I have a Corda. So I've did some searching and found you and others said to use the grado adapter. I was wondering if you think the grado adapter changes the sound at all? I'm still kind of leery of buying it.
I'm looking to get the cardas cable but I have a Corda. So I've did some searching and found you and others said to use the grado adapter. I was wondering if you think the grado adapter changes the sound at all? I'm still kind of leery of buying it.
CFC
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2002
- Posts
- 28
- Likes
- 0
excuse me for my ignorance in audio domain, i havnt gotten a chance to listen to any other 'audiophile-level' headphones except the pair of hd580 which i am currently using... i dont have any reference point to begin with to make valid comparison
so far i have really enjoyed what the senns gave with the stock cables, therefore i am confident equinox wouldnt dissapoint according to what you folks have to say about the cables
now, i was originally leaning toward gettin the equinox/mghead combo... would cardas work be a better pick for moretto HAP-03? oh wait, 'better' aint a politically correct term to use here... maybe more balanced then?
so far i have really enjoyed what the senns gave with the stock cables, therefore i am confident equinox wouldnt dissapoint according to what you folks have to say about the cables
now, i was originally leaning toward gettin the equinox/mghead combo... would cardas work be a better pick for moretto HAP-03? oh wait, 'better' aint a politically correct term to use here... maybe more balanced then?
Jeff Guidry
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2002
- Posts
- 2,614
- Likes
- 13
Quote:
Anything you add to the signal path will change the sound somewhat. I use an RCA to mini adapter to connect my Outlaw cables to my META42. I also have a Cmoy that has both mini and RCA inputs, and when I listened to the same song with the Outlaws connected through the adapter and again directly to the RCA's I did notice a slight reduction in sound quality with the adapter. It wasn't much, but it was noticeable. The degree to which this bothers you will determine how poor you will become in your search to find perfect audio...
| Originally posted by Daemoth Kelly, I'm looking to get the cardas cable but I have a Corda. So I've did some searching and found you and others said to use the grado adapter. I was wondering if you think the grado adapter changes the sound at all? I'm still kind of leery of buying it. |
Anything you add to the signal path will change the sound somewhat. I use an RCA to mini adapter to connect my Outlaw cables to my META42. I also have a Cmoy that has both mini and RCA inputs, and when I listened to the same song with the Outlaws connected through the adapter and again directly to the RCA's I did notice a slight reduction in sound quality with the adapter. It wasn't much, but it was noticeable. The degree to which this bothers you will determine how poor you will become in your search to find perfect audio...
kelly
Herr Babelfish der Übersetzer, he wore a whipped-cream-covered tutu for this title.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2002
- Posts
- 5,435
- Likes
- 12
Quote:
The Grado adapter is well made and isn't likely to effect the sound more than any other adapter (including the straight through ones). The cable is short and its purpose is to keep from putting additional stress on the jack itself, which in the case of the Corda is board-mounted. It's still the adapter I would use, thought 1/4" jacks would be preferable to that. Meier's new preamp uses 1/4" jacks.
A bit too big for me to tote to work, though.
| Originally posted by Daemoth Kelly, I'm looking to get the cardas cable but I have a Corda. So I've did some searching and found you and others said to use the grado adapter. I was wondering if you think the grado adapter changes the sound at all? I'm still kind of leery of buying it. |
The Grado adapter is well made and isn't likely to effect the sound more than any other adapter (including the straight through ones). The cable is short and its purpose is to keep from putting additional stress on the jack itself, which in the case of the Corda is board-mounted. It's still the adapter I would use, thought 1/4" jacks would be preferable to that. Meier's new preamp uses 1/4" jacks.
Users who are viewing this thread
