 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I had the priviledge of being able to listen to these three cables in two very good audio systems. I thought I would offer some comments with perhaps some details to follow as time allows.
My real interest was in comparing the Opus to the other cables, since I have lived with Valhalla and Siltech for a long time. The following comments apply to my own system (Levinson electronics, Wilson speakers and Siltech G3 speaker cable):
1. Vallhalla interconnects are quite good compared to most others. I find them just slightly harsh sounding and not in the same league as either the Siltech or Opus.
2. Siltech G5 Compass Lakes are wonderful interconnects in my system. Emotionally engaging, dynamic, nuanced, timbrally accurate, with sweet extended highs (e.g. violins).
3. Opus interconnects in comparison to Siltech Compass Lake (keeping Siltech G3 speaker cable in place) sound very good in ways described below, but I definitely preferred the sound of the Compass Lakes. They are simply more musical and emotionally engaging and definitly have sweeter (but not rolled off) highs.
4. I was able to borrow from a dealer and all Opus system, two pair of interconnects and also the speaker cable. The sound of this cable system (all Opus) is the most stunningly beautiful I have ever heard, in all ways except two (remember I am talking my system only and system synergy is everything). First the good. These cables are the most transparent, timbrally accurate cables I have ever heard (yes including Siltech). They have an "otherworldly" quality which is unlike anything I have ever heard in a cable. It is addictive. If I wanted to be sarcastic I would call it the "Bose effect". I found myself wondering if Transparent hasn't found the sonic equivalent of heroin or was playing with phase or something to make the sound so extraordinary. Opus is extrememly fascinating to listen to..... most excellent. The only two weaknesses of these cables as heard in my system were they were not emotionally engaging to my ears (they were after a while a little fatiguing to listen to). Second, the highs were a bit edgy, particularly noticeable with violins. Now you could definitely say that this was my system or source (CD) and not the cables, but overall I preferred the sound of the Siltechs because they are emotionally engaging and have beautiful highs, this is even without the G5 (Emperor) speaker cable, with which I think the Siltech would sound much better. Having said that though. I found the sound of the Opuses so fascinatingly good, that if I could solve the problems of the highs and emotional engagement, I would prefer them to any cable I have heard, absolutely (including Siltech). I think I could possibly do this by changing my system all around (tube amps, power cords etc.) but I am not sure it is worth the trouble or expense.
I did hear the Opus (interconnects and speaker cables) on Mikel's system and they sounded great. I suspect he might like to express his thoughts in more detail about this. I found them emotionally engaging in his system. I am not sure about the highs (e.g. as expressed in violins) since we didn't listen to any worthwhile violin music during this audition. However, the caveat was that in our audition of the Opus with Mikel's system we listened to SACD, with my system it was CD only and this could have obviously accounted (at least in part) for the differences in emotional connection between the different systems. Also, Mikel's system is already tweaked toward Opus since he has had the speaker cable for some time. In his system though I have to admit the Opus interconnects bested both the Valhallas and the Siltechs by quite a bit.
5. The best sounding audio system I have ever heard was wired with FIM cable (which I think is nothing special but very heavy gauge copper). That includes my current audition of Opus. So to come back to my original point, with wire, system synergy is everything. In my existing system I preferred the sound of the Siltech cable as compared to Opus (forget about Valhalla). But, if I ever have the time and energy to voice my system properly with Opus cable (changing amps, power cords, tweaks etc., whatever is necessary), I do expect it may well be the best cable currently available in the world. If you consider buying it, I would think it is best to have an all Opus linked system (interconnects and speaker cables) otherwise you won't get the best from the Opus. Unfortunately the price of the Opus puts it out of reach of nearly everyone but corporate CEO's (Enron, Global Crossing etc.).
Follow Ups:
This discussion is enlighting. However I don't see any mention of the Silversmith cables. I have heard the Opus, Vahalla and Siltechs in my system and seveal others as well. I have noticed that the Silversmith Cables are more open, transparent, and tonally correct than the cables listed. I would agree that the Opus cables are very good but, the Silversmith Pladdiums are in a league of their own. My suggestion is to borrow a pair and compare them to anything. Than you will know what I have experienced. These are true bliss.
I don't think Nordost have a chance when compared to other wires since it limits the current. If you compare a bi-wire SPM or even Red-Dawn to any cable, you'll get better results. Especially on 3 way speakers and even more so on those that use large woofers.
unlike when we compared these cables last week in my system (link below), i only heard the Transparent Opus cables in Bud's system. so i have no reference point of what the Compass Lake or Valhalla sounded like in Bud's system. i have listened to Bud's system in the past, but not since he got his Compass Lake. with Bud's resident cable and gear setup it was not practical to quickly compare the whole signal path with all-Opus and all-Siltech.....in any case as Bud mentions above he uses G3 speaker cable (30+ feet of it), so you would not be comparing G5 Siltech anyway.Bud has a good, personal feel for the "normal" sound in his system so i totally defer to his take on the comparison of the performance of the 3 different brands of cable in his system. i must say that Bud's system has a very different sonic signature than my system. i used to have the same Levinson preamp and amps and had the Wilson WP6 speakers so i am familiar with the basic sound and presentation of his system.
so with all those considerations here is what i heard; when i first started my listening Bud played 6 or 7 cd cuts. i was hearing lots of detail and dynamics but was trying to get my bearings on exactly what i was hearing. it was so different than what i am used to hearing i was attempting to discover what was doing what. big soundstage, fast, open, detailed but maybe slightly sterile.....although not terribly so....and after my tubed based system probably a typical response. Bud asked me what i thought and i said it sounded pretty good but i hadn't really got a total feel for it yet. then he mentioned that he percieved it as good on an intellectual level but it was cold and uninvolving to him compared to what he hears with the Siltech cables.
so i suggested we maybe try the Passive Placette RVC that i had brought. my guess was that the ultra-open Opus was affected by the Levinson #32 preamp. we swaped it out and.......dramatic change......here Bud's and my take on what we heard are quite different, and i think the differences in our interpretations relect our different references. also, Bud knows his system much better than i do. in any case, what i now hear from the Placette/Opus combination was much more similar to what i hear in my room. i heard much more detail, openness, tonal color, depth and see-around transparency in the soundstage, better micro and macro dynamics.....waaay more envolving and satisfying.....night and day to my ears.
my opinion is that the Opus is the clearest possible window.....and it will expose any gear that is not quite neutral and transparent. having owned the #32 for 2 years, compared it to the passive volume pots in my Tenor amps, and put it up for sale the next week.....i think that the clarity in Bud's system is limited by the #32. i think the G5 Compass Lake has a beautiful lushness that is a clear asset in Bud's current system but is not an asset in my system.
i want to qualify my comments somewhat since i only listened to the Placette/Opus for 5 or 6 cuts.....so my perceptions might be different if i had taken more time. also, another consideration is that Bud listens to quite a bit of live classical music and may be a more perceptive listener than myself.
this has been a facinating process.....the Opus is a product that will make some systems much better......but it is not for every system.
context, context, context
mikel
Hi Mikel,
I agree with your comments. In your (great) sounding system the Opus was by far the best of the three. I also saw it's magic in my system, but I would have to work hard to re-adjust the direction of my system to eliminate the weaknesses I heard there (i.e. where are those 150 watt Tenor amps I've heard rumored????)!
Regards,
Bud
my opinion on the #32 preamp compared to the Placette RVC is really more a comment on any preamp and reflects a personal bias of mine based on my experience in my system. if i were to live with the #32 for awhile in Bud's system there may be aspects of it i would come to prefer to the Placette.in my brief experience in Bud's system i did clearly prefer the Placette.
also, Bud is a huge believer in proper phase being critical for listening satisfaction. the #32 will change phase, the Placette won't. since Bud's DAC (Levinson 30.6) will also change phase we were still able to correct for phase on each cut.
mikel
This has been a fascinating and well presented dialogue. Thank you both, Mikel and Bud. The clear emphasis on the impact of system synergies ("context" as Mikel so aptly put it) is an excellent reminder to us all. Well Done!
Mikel,
Why are so many people posting that the active Placette is so much better than the passive variant? And that going from passive to active Placette is an upgrade? If the theory of less is more is correct then I would think it should be the other way around.
Mikel:It may very well seem to be a contradiction that an active linestage could be even more transparent (distortionless) than a passive device that uses the same Vishay S102C attenuator, but in our case it's true. The reason for the so called "solid state sound" in otherwise good high end systems is, believe it or not, the volume control. Adding an output stage to the typical volume control simply insures that the volume controls distortion ("brightness") is faithfully passed on to the power amp.
But if you eliminate that controls distortion, then adding the output amplifier simply lowers the output impedance to a very low level, insuring that every last bit of musical detail actually makes it to the power amp intact. Also, the low output impedance insures quieter operation for a blacker background.
When using a simple volume pot in a passive situation, the impedance problems cause enough of a roll-off of the highs help cover up the distorion from the pot thus helping to get rid of some of the brightness. But then you also lose musical detail. Using Vishay S102C resistors with the almost purely resistive load they offer to the source enables a passive device to work much better than it has any right to work. With a fairly low impedance source, the performance is exceptional.
But adding a pair of very high quality class-a output amps fed by two huge power supplies will isolate your source from the amp load. And the low output impedance will insure that the signal that arrives at the amp is an exact image of the signal from the source with nothing added or taken away.
Guy Hammel, Placette Audio
hi Guy,i am out of town and just saw your excellent explaination. it is a treat getting the straight answers from the designer of the gear. thanks for taking the time.
i have some questions;
1. are you saying that in every case your active preamp will sound better than your passive?
2. or if the sources have sufficient output, the amplifier has sufficient gain, and the interconnect between the RVC and the amp is sufficiently short (and the impedence issues are correct)......can the passive be equal or better than the active?
i am using 3 sources that all have plenty of gain into a switchbox and then using one 23 foot xlr interconnect into the RVC and then a 1 meter xlr into my Tenor amps which have 40k input impedence. i have plenty of gain with all sources.
i don't have any of the output specs with me to share at this time. but last year when we discussed my set-up i recall that my sources had fairly low output impedences and that you felt it would be optimized with the passive RVC.
my switchbox is a custom design which is "suppose" to allow the source impedence to pass unaltered (according to it's builder).
in any case, my "arrangement" is a good deal better to my ears than any active device i have yet tried. i get the identical performance from the Placette RVC as i get from the Tenor amps used in the integrated mode. i prefer this performance to any active gain stage used with the Tenor amps in my or any other Tenor system i have heard.
if there is a better solution for my situation i would like to consider it.
best regards
mikel
Mikel:In almost every case the active will outperform the passive, enabling a slightly clearer, slightly more detailed sound and a slightly lower noise floor. This is because of the extremely low output impedance of the Active Linestage.
But your system is such an ideal application for a passive that it may be quite dificult to hear an improvemant with the active. Although I could see that the passive may equal the active in a system like yours, I could never imagine it actually outperforming the active. It's just about impossible to beat an ultra low output impedance for insuring that the signal arrives at the power amp intact and noise free.
Over the years we have offered a trade-back policy to our passive customers so they can trade up to the active. In all that time, not one passive user has preferred the passive. All have preferred the active in spite of it's much higher price.
It would not seem to make sense that by adding more to the circuit that the fidelity could actually be improved but the audio signal that comes out of the volume control can be quite fragile. Going directly into high quality output amps from the volume control seems to lock-in the shape of the signal and make it more robust so that it can get through the cables intact. I think that the reason so many solid state active linestages sound bright and so many listeners avoid them is because of the the volume control distortion. Since an active linestage will also see to it that it's volume control distortion is passed accurately to the power amp, that means brightness and irritation. But getting rid of the volume control distortion itself means that the output amps can really help in delivering the audio signal to the power amp in it's purest form, in the exact same shape it was in when it left the source. Which of, course, is also an active device.
Guy Hammel, Placette Audio
hi Bud,
answer #1. every system is differentanswer #2. i haven't heard the active Placette....it may be better than the passive. in any case i don't use the preamp....in my system i use the RVC (remote volume control) and a passive switchbox.
answer #3. it may be unfashionable to suggest that the highest resolution systems may expose limitations of active gain stages that other systems may need.....but i humbly suggest that this may be the case.
if the Placette active is better than the RVC in my system it would also have to be better than all the other preamps i and other Tenor owners have abandoned for passive including Levinson #32, Lamm L2, CJ ART II, and the BAT VK-50SE. i guess that is possible but not likely.
this past weekend i compared my Lamm LP2 Delux thru the Placette and thru the Lamm L2 preamp......to my ears the Placette allowed more detail and dynamics and seemed to remove a veil that was there with the L2 preamp.....it sounded more real thru the Placette. would most systems have caused this result?
by systems i really mean the amp and speakers as a tandum.
mikel
Mikel,
The theory you describe ("less is more" or let's throw the pre-amp out with the baby and the bathwater) has been around for quite a while and it makes good conceptual sense. But as I see it, each and every component, wire, power cord, speaker etc. in a system either adds or subtracts something to the sound. The sum of all these additions and subtractions is what we perceive in the end as music. Most people strive for "the absolute sound" i.e. what is closest to the real thing. I would say my bias is toward what sounds natural but also, to my ears, beautiful. I have heard some aweful sounding live concerts. But back to the point. If you take away a component from the chain (i.e. a pre-amp) you remove whatever sonic signature (additions or subtractions) from your system that this might have...this we agree on. But whether this has a salutary effect on the end resulting sound is debatable. For example if an entire system is "voiced" to it's best including all components in the chain (including pre-amp), removing this may well leave the sound of the upstream components unbalanced and less sonically desireable. Also, this theory of less is more assumes that whatever is upstream of the pre-amp is closer to the holy grail of sound and that it cannot be improved upon. As we both know, lot's of downstream things can improve the upstream sound (e.g. Opus speaker cables). The main thrust of my missive is that I did not like the Placette in my system. I thought the sound while gaining something, also lost something (and the latter was more important to me than the former). But given that it was only a brief listen, with unfamiliar cables, I will have another go at it with "open ears".
Cheers,
Bud
I give in. I will have to at least try it. Thanks for the perpectives.
Nice review. The Siltech G5 is the best cable IMO. There are others that are close for far less. I cannot afford the $20-30k Opus speaker cables (have to borrow). I still find the Opus not as sharply focused as some others, however.
Similar technology and similar price points with Transparent Opus series... Also similar in having refrigerator-sized boxes stuck on cables and even similar names, starting with letter "O."Surely, somebody here at AA has heard the Oracle?
Hi, you wrote
"The best sounding audio system I have ever heard was wired with FIM cable"Do you mean the old Fulton FMI cable? If so, what was the system you heard it with?
Bob Fulton was one of the first people to realize that wire makes a difference (even before Monster Cable and others.)
No the FIM cable I am referring to is from "First Impression Music". The system I heard it in was the owners who went to fanatical lengths to create the perfect system including a completely sonically designed room and every possible tweak along the entire audio chain you could imagine. To be fair I have heard FIM cables in other systems and they sounded really bad (including my own). My point was that system synergy is so very important or "there is more than one way to skin a cat". Another great system I heard was all Linn (Linn's best electronics) connected by Linn's silver "zip cord". I think it isn't just the wire that makes the system but in part the system that makes the wire.
I understand from your system profile that you planned an eventual upgrade to all Siltech 5 - would your current experiences change your mind at all? I'm also curious about the FIM cables you sampled; I think they are now distributed by someone else other than the original manufacturer.BTW Bud, you have a very sweet system. I'm lusting after the "mini" Aesthetix phono stage, but I guess I have to decide on a TT first.
BR,
Arooj
Well, I wish I could buy 45 feet of Siltech Emperor but at over 100K I think I will have to pass. I am on hold for a while about the Opus and would like to rethink things, but it is certainly intriguing. I am pretty happy with my system as it is. If I were to upgrade something in the near future, I would like to find a pair of tube amps with enough power to drive my speakers to the listening levels I need for the room. (FIM=First Impression Music). The Aesthetix Io is great...love it!
As we have virtually the same system, an upgrade to Tenor amps offers an almost magical improvement in the system. I bought the Tenors without audition primarily based on mikel’s recommendation. I kept my 33h’s in case I made a serious mistake. With both amps in-house I had the time to demo each in a controlled test. The result was not even close – Tenors, Levinson 32-pre and Grand Slams make possibly the best sound on earth (or at least second to mikel’s system)! As to power, this was my biggest concern because I listen to all types of music including rock. The amps does it all including Led Zeppelin at ear shattering levels.Great Cable review!
I'd love to try out a pair of Tenors. At 75 watts per channel, I am concerned that they will not adequately drive the X-1's to the listening levels I need for large orchestral music in my (fairly) large listening room. What is your experience with this? How big is your room, what is your associated gear etc.? If you don't mind sharing I would be very interested. Also, I have heard a rumor that Tenor will be coming out with a 150 Watt version of their amps in which case I am absolutely interested. Many thanks.
Bud......you might also investigate Atma-sphere MA-1's. I heard from a couple of Stereophile show attendees that they ran circles around the Tenor's in a head-to-head comparison. Apparently, the Tenor's ran out of steam with the show speakers being used. Also, the MA-1's are a few thousand dollars less costly. I think there was a thread about this a few weeks ago on the General forum.Standard disclaimer......I have no business relations with Atma-sphere, don't own their products, and have not done any direct comparisons as stated above.
.....mentioned in the thread was not exactly unbiased.as far as information that you have that is second-hand; that supposed "event" was an after-hours comparison that has more than one perspective. "Stereophile Show Attendees" infers some casual unbiased listeners who just happen to have heard this comparison.....which from what i know is simply not the case.
in any case the MA-1 is also a great amp and has twice the rated power of the Tenors.....so i am not doubting that it may work better with some speakers. but i am questioning the credibility of the information you are referring to.
Alan, i know you to be a stand up guy, so don't get me wrong. you are just saying what you heard others say.
if someone who was actually there has something to say about this event i would love to hear about it.
regards
mikel
Hi Mike,
It may boil down to personal preferences. There was an earlier discussion on Tenor vs. Atma-Sphere here . Ralph Karsten's post to the thread may be of interest here.
Brian Walsh
hi Brian,my comments had nothing to do with the result of the "comparison" or which amp is better/worse. in fact, i totally agree with your comments that these differences many times are simply a matter of taste. Tenor lovers and Atmasphere lovers have much more in common than not.
my only concern is....who is the source of the comments? if the source is the manufacture of one of the amps, that doesn't make the comments invalid, but it would be important information for anyone judging impartaliality.
my information is that the only participant to speak out on this "event" is the manufacturer of one of the amps.....not exactly the ideal impartial source.
best regards
mikel
The Tenor's and the Atma-Sphere's are both finely-built components with designers that are passionate about their endeavors. In many respects, differences between extremely high-grade components I liken to food and wine tasting....one individual prefers a St. Julien, another prefers Pouilly-fuisse, another Bardolino or Chianti Reserva, etc. etc. In the end, each prospective listener/customer should compare these fine components in their own listening environment, and let their ears decide which they prefer.And you are right, Mike. Who said what, and when, in this instance, ultimately doesn't serve the music.
......the sources of my information".Oh, sorry....I'm not testifying in Congress about this. :--)
I talked with several people post-show about a lot of things post-show, including this Tenor/Atma-sphere comparison, and I honestly don't remember who the people were if I had to swear in court. I think one of them was Clark Johnsen, but again I can't swear to it. He can confirm things. The other fellow was either in the biz (an east coast dealer I know), or a customer from Boston, but I don't remember which. Again, I talked with quite a number of people that attended the show, to get their take on things. A lot has gone under the bridge for me since that time.
I also talked with Ralph Karsten about this comparison (to confirm it took place), but he was *not* the source I referred to in my previous post. I do remember that I heard "pooped out" in reference to the Tenor's driving that particular speaker, and the Atma-sphere's doing a much better job. That I remember. And the two gents that mentioned these happenings *were* in fact, "casual, unbiased listeners". Neither of them own either Tenor's or Atma-sphere's. Sorry.
Actually it is not my league in terms of your high-end systems (simply cannot afford) but the appreciation of good gears and the share of interest I believe should be of no difference among audiophiles.I saw from a local hifi mag that it used Tenor Audio OTL 75 Wp to drive Rockport Hyperion with very stunning result and the combination was just simply magic. I wish I have a chance to audition! Just my two cents.
So why don't you go and have an audition? The dealer's show room is in Central.
heeI am not in Hong Kong but Singapore so that is why I siad I wish to have the chance. Here products are not as many as in HK because of the small market. You are lucky because you can audition in the Hi Fi Tuck's showroom (sorry, my translation of the name). May be you can post your comments after your audition.
I think it also answers the question from Bud "Where???".
Sorry I didn't understand where the dealer showroom you are referring to is. Please clarify. Thanks.
.
Kuma, since you asked ... I have extensively tested Valhalla against
NBS Statement extreme and also Kharma Enigma (interconnects only)
The Enigma is supposed to be similar to G5.
On my system the NBS and Kharma outperformed the Valhalla by a considerable margin. A friend termed the phrase 'harmonic saturation' to describe some of the differences.Both NBS and Kharma had a greater
sense of realism , witht the NBS exhibiting a slightly better impression of 'liveness' .Both cables brought the listener closer to the perception of the 'real' event than the Valhalla (slightly thin and harsh in comparison and less dimensional).At this level however
system synergy becomes so important that slight differences in cables
may reflect underlying limitations of the equipment.
actualy, Omega's voicing is closer to the Valhalla's
than with Statement Extreme.Both Extreme and Omega have a forward presense
region differ from their older lines as you've spoted as 'liveness' .
Yet, since their top end is lot more open than before, they do work
well in variety of systems. They still retain NBS house sound
but, these are bit of a departure from the past, IMHO.I've been mixing and matching depending on system needs.
Which speakers do you use?
Speakers are Pipedream 7'reference with 4 bass bins.
The new range of NBS are more open , I havent heard the omega's
but I wouldnt characterise the Statement Extremes as forward.
The 'liveness' I refer to seems to extend through the full frequency range and not just the presense area.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
