Pre Phono: Van den Hul Grail; Audia Flight Phono; Grandinote Celio.

If it was a turntable it would be a direct drive, a Garrard.

If it was a tonearm it would be a Linn Ekos

If it was a cartridge it would be a ...yes a VDH.

If it was a geographical place it would be the Savanes in South Africa

If it was a wine it would be a Barolo Pio Cesare

If it was a pianist it would be Sviatoslav Richter

If it was a jazz guitar player it would be Wes Montgomery

If it was a tonearm it would be a Triplanar

If it was a turntable it would be an high mass, a Mitchell Orbe.

If it was a cartridge it would be a Dynavector

If it was a geographical region it would be Brittany in France.

If it was a wine it would be a Chateau Latour

If it was a pianist it would be Evgeni Koroliov

If it was a jazz guitar player it would be Joe Pass

If it was a turntable it would be a Sota.

If it was a tonearm it would be a tangent one or a Naim Aro; I couldn't decide between the two
If it was a cartridge it would be a Koetsu

If it was a region it would be the region of Tuscane in Italy.

If it was a wine it would be a Chassagne-Montrachet

If it was a pianist it would be Anton Rubinstein

If it was a jazz guitar player it would be Grant Green

Audia Flight Phono

This unit MUST BE BROKEN IN. Audia says it runs for 50 hours and this is the least for it to sound ok, but if your unit for a reason or another has not been ran in you will be aware of it very easily: it will sound bad. As simple as that. It is not a question of getting used to its sound. If it does not have enough hours of playing you cannot get used to the sound it makes since it sounds very poorly. The high frequencies will be aggressive and the sound will be closed in and also a little slow. After about 30 hours of music playing, not just leaving the unit on, it will start improving. At about 40 hours the unit starts to sound quite good and it will become excellent only later.

Of course I will write about its performance after the run in process has been done. So now you know that if you buy this unit and it doesn't sound good it means it needs to be played for many hours. I say this because we are at a level with these phono stages that if you buy any one of these without even earing it or comparing it  you will be totally happy.  And even comparing them will put you to the point of not defining a better or worse but of different qualities. Only at direct comparison you could prefer slightly one over the other, each one is so complete and so well balanced in its performance that you cannot not like it.

For this reason in the prelude I wrotw many of if it would be a pianist or a jazz guitar player it would be and so on. If you realized they are compared to absolutely excellent musicians , wines and so on.

Now back to the Audia and its main characteristic: warm austerity.

It is strange to combine these two adjectives. Generally when we think about austerity we think about being cold too. Not here. I don't have many things to compare this strange feeling to if not to a composer: Bach. If the Audia  was a musician it would be Bach. I think the music of Bach describes the Audia well. It has power and composure, it is austere but light and warm at the same time. It is articulate and deep and even when it goes fast it doesn't show it. It let the music go but always in a controlled way, it is easy but complete at the same time. Now about its warmth. How can be a unit absolutely neutral, austere and at the same time warm to make me think of Bach? The midrange warmth is not due to any kind of colorations. It is dead neutral. So from what this coloration comes from? It took me a while to figure this out. It is given by a lesser dynamic contrast or less evident then in the other range transient attack in the bass medium range. Doing this way the bass the medium is not coloured or pushed up a la Linn LP12 or a la LS3/5a giving an euphonic warmth, but it looses that very small percentage of transparency  that would bring this unit to sound clinical. I found out this to give also an elegant signature to its sound.

And then now we have to talk about the silence between the notes.  The Audia is the master of silence. This silence space is dark but not thick. I hate when is thick. Its redention of the silence is the best of the other two phono here. Another thing that the Audia does better then the other two phono here is the layering in the depth. This depth is at a level of absolute reference.

The Audia is the phono stage here that gave me more the feeling of giving what it gets and adding  less of its own to the music reproduction.
At its proposed price is an unbelievable achievement and very hardly understated since we don't have any recent review of this phono stage. It is on a pair with one of my two reference units and very close to the other one I use as reference, loosing in their comparison some timbric richness (but this reference unit has tubes) but winning with a deeper silence and more flexibility. One these two unit is more then double of the Audia price and the other one is more then the triple of its price...

VDH Grail.

At this price range you need to have something to say in a more special way that is common. We are getting in a territory in which the performer does not only have to know how to do it but it must have its own way of doing right. Like excellent musicians. They are not just technically complete but also each one of them has its own way of giving you the same musical message.

For the VDH Grail this special characteristic is instruments differentiation, but not like we normally intend it, for this reason this is its special talent.This differentiation is due to the rendition of their very own dynamic window (rare) and accurate space more then their timbre differentiation that is good but not excellent or the tonal colours that are very good but not in the rarely heard land. I will add more about this individual dynamic window since this is a rare characteristic. You ear the dynamic of each instruments not in an open window that contains the all dynamic expression of all the musical message that is more common, but each instrument has its on window, bigger or smaller. This I found very fascinating and entertaining. In combination with a great dynamic contrast. The Grail has the best dynamic contrast of the other two phono here. It has power and finesse. 

It proposes you a music you can see.

You don't only ear the instruments but you have an almost material reconstruction, like an acoustic hologram. If you like this you cannot find a better phono then this one.

Life is what you can see or music is what it can make you see.

Grandinote Celio

Here the key word is: you must know what you want and what you are doing.

I develop this concept. 

It does not has the layering in the depth of the Audia or its silence between the instruments or the dynamic contrast of the VDH Grail but with no doubt has the best timbre and timbrique shades. Expecially in the high frequencies is capable of giving textures and shadings and this is extremely rare. Then it manages to give the best medium bass that I have ever heard on a phono stage. This region is extremely detailed without being analitical or hard . It is just at the border of doing too much but it doesn't do it. It stops just a little before. 

Its bass goes deep but it is not tight but manage the rare ability to be agile even though it shoudn't be since a little soft. It is like a fat cat. It is agile in its movements even though is a little soft.

This is what you get with no loading so at 47kohm or at about 1000ohm.

If your system and your cartridge likes it or your intention is to build an analogue source around the Celio you will get to a magic level, you will get a fluidity that it even rare in the best tubed unit with a silence that for the tubed unit is absolutely imposible to obtain.

But if your cartridge or one of your cartridges don't like the 47 kohm load (or 1000 ohm) and you need to load the Celio down things will change. You will loose its magic. It will become just very good. If you like fluidity, tibres, and an absolutely impressive transparent and spelling medium range, just get the Celio and buy a cartridge that likes the open loading. I had an extremely good combination with a VDH Black Beauty medium output (1mv). 

The Celio is like a F1. You cannot blame the car if you didn't use the right tires or the right aereodinamic charge or setting. The Celio does not forgives. Or to say it better it forgives your mistakes but you pay for them loosing its magic. And out there there are very, very very few magic units. If you want magic get a Celio and work with it. You should just consider the Celio as the starting point of your analogue chain. It is the status  it likes to have and that deserve to have considering the final results you can get out from it.

Wireworld Platinum Electra Power Cord

This is the top of the power cord line offered from Wireworld.

There are still many out there, but they are becoming less and less, that think a power cord cannot make that much difference. The ones that keep on thinking this belong to the same categorie of people that at the beginning of the genesis of the hifi cable war were saying the same thing about interconnect and loudspeaker cables.

It is true that you can put up togheter an extremely good system with fairly cheap wires but generally these systems are already expensive and if you put on them better cables they will sound better anyway.

It is also true that each system and each ears have preference over a certain cable and it is not true that the more expensive one is always the best matching or to our liking.

This is a prelude to say I am not the kind of being seduced by a price tag (even though I am very sensible to build quality) , but I am not the kind of keeping an hard line that a cable cannot make a difference. I plug a cable and give time to settle and if it is good to my ears is good. For me it is like going out to dinner: I don't care if they explain me how fantastic and elaborate a plate is, I taste it and if I like I like if I don't l don't. But we have to admit that if we want to be for help to others we are not going to write about wines if we don't drink wine or about how good a fish is done if we cannot stand fish at all. We must have a certain exposition and a developped sensibility to these kind of taste and nuances. 

If you are considering spending this kind of money on a power cord it means you already been exposed to the ruin of being after not only to what you like but to the mistery of how good it can be.

Let's say it immediately: this cable is an extremely good power cord. Its place is with the very best.

The Platinum Electra is surely better then most cord cables costing 20-30% less (I say most since I didn't heard them all, it is impossible) and it is better of most costing the same price.

If Ihave to sum its sound up in few words I would say: tidy composure within a great dynamic expression. It is true that many times these two qualities or adjectives are mutually exclusive, for this reason I think the Platinum is a special cable. 

Its dynamic window is very open and relaxed nothing is projected or compressed. Yes you have a sensation of frequencies freedom in all the music spectrum. All this with a dead black silence. Noise floor very, very low. I would say there is no noise at all. Surely one of the lowest for a power cord.

Then you listen a little longer and you will notice every time the same thing: it is so linear in the medium high-high frequency, linear and clean. But the best caracteristic of this is the density of these frequencies. It is not clear and ethereal or splashy, it is clear with a density. And this is rare. Generally when hifi gears goes open up high things up there get untidy. Not with the Platinum. It is clear and tidy.

Focus is extremely good and also very good are its ritmic capabilities that keeps involvement high. This involvement is lacking in many hi end power cords. You enjoy them with your brain but not with your heart. The kind of an extremely accomplished guitar player that can play everything at the speed he wants, playing each note and chords without the minor esitation but that at the end you cannot care less since he is not able to convey the soul of what he is playing.

Its timbres are very well rendered but not so colorful as in other cost no object cables and its tidiness walks on a tigthrope to be felt, I said felt, but it is more a suggestion of being slightly mechanical then the actual feeling it is slightly mechanical. This last "weak point" I think actually to be a great achievement since it let the hifi lover that can sometimes be also a music lover like I am to appreciate both things: the hifi and the music. Sometimes in some system you hear the music well pulling all the right emotions out of you, but when you are in the hifi mood and you start listening mostly with your brain you realize you need more layers more focus and so on.

But is in the using with many gears that you are going to really get the best quality of this power cord. And this quality you soon realize is a necessity. Then you put it in a preamplifier, then to an amplifier then to another amplifier and so on. Your preamp was sounding open and dynamic, it will make it sound more open and dynamic, or it has a beautiful rithmic expression it is going to make this expression even more evident, the amp you plug in is neutral, is going to be even more neutral, it is warm sounding it will make it sound warm. This cable will let the component is connected to give it all it has. If you thought your preamp was good you never thought it was so good when you connect it to this cable. And even something else: I have a preamplifier that I always considered OK but when I gave it this cable I was stunned to find out how good it was. It is like it really needed this cord to fly. Especially components conceived to be as neutral as possible  will profundly benefit from this cable because they show too often the caracter of the power cord they are connected with. So when they are kind of slow or do not focus that well or show a constrained dynamic expression you won't believe what all these caracteristics comes from the power cords they are connected with. Of course I am talking about good, well above average component, not average components. To say the truth I don't know how an average not so good component will react to this power cord, I didn't try it with, but I doubt who spends this kind of moiney on a power cord is in possession of a mediocre one.

The problem with this kind of cables is that they are so obviously superior to so many cables out there that is a real, real problem trying them out without having the money to buy them.

Another problem that I have tried to solve was this: if I have enough money to buy only one of this Platinum, where should I put it? 

The more I listen to power cords the more I realize that we have to seriously revise our way of spending on our hifi. I think power cords are the cables to start with our search on making our system sound better.

Tiger Paw Akula update

It has been a while since my wrtiting about the Tiger Paw Akula LP12 subchassis.
In the meantime I have kept on listening and trying and found out new insight.

I have spent more time trying to highlight the difference between the two way the Akula can be mounted: the 1- classical way, with the armboard connected to the floating subchassis like all other Linn subchassis and the 2- fixed armoboard way, where the armboard is fixed to the plinth and the rest of the subchasis floats.

Again many cartridges used. Many it means 12. And four completely different preamp-amp-loudspeakers conbinations. Yes a lot of work!

This is what I would like to add to my previous findings: the two armboard mounting options do sound different from each other and in some combination their differences is very evident in other combination is just evident. So which differences are we talking about? First of all is reassuring to say the timing and rithmic capabilities is a sonic parameter that is left untouched from the different mounting methods and this is reassuring. This for me is very important since it means the musical message is not going to collapse any way you mount it. Timbres and focalisation of the instruments are differents and with them a different kind of resolution and transparency.
Let's develop this:
classical way (armboard connected to the subchassis): timbres are more compact more dense. This makes the depth of the immage more evident since the different timbres contrast is more evident.

If mounted with the armboard fixed to the plinth the density of the timbre is less compact it has less colour but has more shadings, more microdetails, more ambience clues. The landscape is larger and higher and it has a wider dynamic window. It is more like a tube sound compared to the armboard connected to the subchassis that can be closer to a solid state sound.

Another thing to notice is that with the armboard fixed to the plinth the turntable is more reactive to changment to different thing such tonearm cable, the shelf or table where is located and more sensible to external vibrations.

As said in my first findings I have the feeling that much of this is due to the different setting of the suspension since whith the armboard connected to the plinth the spring are less loaded.

At the end I can say that with the classical mounting you have a sound that is much closer to the original LP12 sound. With the armboard mounted to the plinth the sound gets closer to a Michel Gyrodeck without loosing the LP12 follow the tune capability. Read well: itgets closer means the sound gets to that direction not that is more similare to a Gyrodeck then to a Linn LP12.

If you love your LP12 and just want to improve it go with the classical mount; if you like your LP12 but you are not able to love it since it feels a little too different from other turntables you like you can use the amboard fixed to the plinth method.

Last thing. This is completely woo do and for me not technically comprehsible: the Naim Aro user knows that one day it sounds magic and another one it can sound strange. Strange means not so good, not so good as you know it can sound with the same music playing.

With the armboard fixed to the plinth this inconsistency is just gone. It sounds always the same.
With the classical mounting (armboard fixed to the subchassis) the Akula gives the Aro a better consinstency then other subchassis, say the Majik or the Sole (not tried the VII latest version)  or the Rubikon (out of production) , but it still can happen, even though much more rarely, that one not good day. Go and figure this out why...

Which one I prefer? you know I am an hifi Casanova so I need to leave the doors open for different acoustic affairs, so I cannot really say I prefer one to the other if I have both option open, but if personally I had to choose only one I would go for the fixed armboard. I would have if one option was loosing the rytmic capability I love, but it is more question of tonality then other things. One thing for sure: the classic mounting option is more open to accept cheap cartridges and let them sing well and questioning the more expensive ones. With the fixed armboard mounting the cheap cartridges sound more the way they are or they should sound or whatever. If they are good  they expose a good cheap sound, you are more aware of the missing nuances or colouration or other shortcomings that are well taken care by the more expensive cartridges. The classical mounting option in a way it molds the cartridge you are using to its own musicality. The way LP12 did and does. It is like the turntable and the cartridge become one instrument. With the fixed armboard option it is like a chorus, they partecipate at the same performance but you can hear them in their own. It is more difficult to get the best out since you get more out.

One word for the comparing method. I am completely and absolutely unfavorable to the A/B comparing method. It is the best selling method but surely (for me) not the best method to get truth out of a listening.In an A/B method you will tend to be pushed on your judgment by some caracteristic of the system A or B. It is not a absolute judgment but a biased one. The bias is set by one of the two systam or by both and with this bias set we get to conclusions that are biased. So what happens? We buy something more expensive and "better" performing in many parameters that were exposed by the A/B comparison then we start living with it and after few weeks or months we start to feel something is not right. What was better transform itself in not right. Yes I know it is difficult, but it is the way it is. This method, the A vs B, is not the right method but it the most comfortable for our conscious of well spending our money.
It makes me think about an article I have red not too long time ago about Stradivari violins. They gave these violins to play in a blind test against some new produced violins.Most of the players chose the new products. But beyond this test everybody using Stradivari said that a stradivari is like having more colours to paint...

Let's get deeper into this: you have three systems that are the same, same tonearm, same pre phono, same pre phono loading, Naim Aro tonearm, same cartridge, same set up.
In one you have the Akula sub chassis with the armboard fixed to the plinth (I call for brevity Akula 1) , another one with the Akula but with the armboard fixed to the subchassis (I call for brevity Akula 2) , and another LP12 with another maker subchassis. What happens? The Akula 1 sound more open more dynamic but less material, the Akula 2 sound more solid, the system three sound the way it sound better or worse then the other two options.

But what happens if we change cartridge loading? Why I get into this? Because with the Akula 2 and other subchassis I tend to charge less the cartridge in comparison two other references turntables I have got.
Before I was setting to 1000 ohm but if I set to 100 ohm the Akula 1 is better then the other two.
This loading matter happened since with different LP12 subchassis I had the tendency to load less the cartridge in comparison to what I know these cartridges sounded best in other systems.

What this suggest me is that the Akula 1 is the most transparent to the cartridge, so we have to control it with the correct loading; Akula 2 corrects the loading overdumping the subchassis with the mass of the armboard fixed to the subchassis (Linn classical way).

So at the end you realize that set up at the best to what each system needs the Akula 1 will bring you further; set up without optimisation or like another similar subchasiss the Akula 2 have more possibility to sound better then an Akula 1. But Akula 1 definetely can bring you further. The Akula 1 let you much more hearing the limit of the cartridge you are using.

For example you have two VDH cartridges. the DDTII at the entry level and the Crimson.
With the Akula 2 and loaded the same the Crimson is better then the DDTII but I don't think in the comparison you can justify 4 times the price.
With the Akula 1 the DDTII limits are more apparents, even thought it is an excellent cartridge, but when you mount the Crimson you can perfectly ear why it costs 4 times the price of its little sister.



Now this is all I can say about the Akula.

listening

 These are the most expensive cables ever made by VDH, and among the most expensive cables on the market. The CNT and The Platinum.
I am listening to them. In the near future I will write my personal impressions.

VDH The Platinum first impressions: 

extremely neutral in the good sence of the term since there is a very nice density and diversity of timbres but be very careful: it will lend you to a wrong conclusion since it lets the sound with the matching louspeaker cables becoming very important.

to be continued

VDH DDTII special

I am not used to this kind of price cartridges. Unfortunately during the years I have got so exigent (or sick) with music reproduction that the least expensive cartridge I have in my collection is already double price of this VDH.

So for me trying this cartridge and see how it perform it was not like I cannot wait to see which kiind of special magic it will be releasing. But I was not prepared for its performance too.

I used to like or better appreciate dynavectors of its price range but after few times what they make me feel it is missing is essential for me. With this cartridge instead what it is missing it is not essential. This is what it is absolutely wonderful about this cartridge. It is a very good balanced act. Its dynamic capabilities are so evident that even though the timbres are not in the same ligue of the VDH Crimson or other very high priced cartridges, you don't care too much about it if you are not more then concentrate to its shortcomings. The comparison with two of my favorites cartridges in more or less this price range are educative: the Dynavector DV 20X2 has a beautiful bass reproduction but is shows differences in the quality and nature of the reproduction of the entire frequency range and the same I felt when I compared this VDH to  the DV17 D3 another extremely good cartridge. It is not a question of being coloured since both these cartridges are very linear cartridges but it is like some parts of their music reproduction are made from different natures. It is a very difficult thing to explain. If for example the frequencies would be wood the bass for example would be mapple, then a little higher in the midbass range you will also have wood but oak and then higher up you will still have wood but would be teak. With this VDH music comes out for the same piece of cloth or wood if staying with my previous example. This could sound strange but it is very important for the final listening satisfaction and a very rare quality. This quality was also apparent in one of my favourite cartridges of all time that is the Myabi standard that unfortunately is not longer in production.

The DDT II special lets you playing music hours after hours without waiting to put back on your special esoteric cartridges (in my case) or to wait to upgrade it.

I have tried this last thing up: upgrading. The results were very interesting. I don't want to mention the different cartridges I have tried in this upgrading path, but they all come from extremely known and well considered firms. The thing that came out is that to be really, really sure the more expensive model had really something better to offer, and not just a fraction of the music reproduction but all the musical message, this surely better cartridge was at least three times higher in price then the DDTII.

It means that with double price maybe you can get better image solidity, or better timbre reproduction but at the same time you will have a more compressed dynamic or whatever.

This findings has been extremely interesting for me and I think should be useful for a lot of passionate like I am.

So if you don't have an insane amount of money you can be sure that with this one you get a lot out of your record.

This cartridge is fast, dynamically extremely open, of good transparency and very easy to match with differents tonearms and to different listeners.

I made listen to this cartridge to a coupple of friends with whom we often disagree on our liking and this cartridge managed to be liked by both of them so it must be doing something objectively right.

The only downside that doesn't have anything to do with its sound is its name: DDT. Depth, dynamic  and timbre. It is not that this cartridge it is not capable in these domains, but I think it is not a cartridge that let you appreciate the music frangmented in its part but more as a whole. I would have called it VDH Standard since basis of comparison.
I say this in a not light way. For basis of comparison I mean not the highest standard achievable, but a standard to whom refering also to see how much better is another much more expensive cartridge.

Shortcomings: of course this cartridge has shortcomings. Anything has shortcomings even reality. You know an instruments sound better in a room instead of another, an orchestra sound better in a theatre in comparison with another so how things play depends largely where thery are played.

In absolute terms when you play a lot with this cartridge you will find its shortcomings and as I did you will find out they are not essential to the musical message. If you find any other shortcomings you are finding the shortcomings of the rest of the chain where this cartridge is playing.
I say this thing very firmly expecially after I have red a review in a French hifi magazine.
I immediately say with their test surely don't try to find the nature of things. I am almost sure they mount the cartridge in one or two systems and listen and arrive to a conclusion. There is a certain truth in this wrong approach since this is the approach that most people will have. They are not going to find the real taste of any hifi gears since this taste will be spoilt or exalted by the other things they are connected with.
I try to really get out the real taste of somothing. This means at many, many connections and trying out.

First found shortcomings that we think is of this cartridge, as also found in a French magazine: the timbre lack a little in density.
But, and this is very annoying, this shortcoming is not really of the cartridge. Connected to good quality cables you have this kind of feeling.
Then just for the hell of it I connected my phono preampli with hi end cable like the VDH the Silver MKIII. What happened? This shortcoming was not there any more. So was the cartridge or the cable?It was the cable. The thing is that most of the cables with this cartridge will show this shortcomings except the cable that have the best timbre reproduction. You can put also the VDH First Ultimate in this list and the very expensive Tara Labs Zero and few others.
If I change it with the Dynavector DV17, or the Goldring Eroica, I cannot get the same timbre beauty of the VDH DDT II special when using the most expensive cables, but with these cartridges I get slightly better timbre reproduction with "normal" cables.

So I was brought to this question - conclusion: does this cartridge shows timbre deficinecies in the rest of your equipment? Apparently yes. But it is a strange thing. This kind of things happens only when a component is extremely and I repeat extremely well balanced. So finely balanced that whatever is taken away by other components from its fine balance will be showned. So if a catridge has rich timbre redintion  and we put this cartridge in a system that is slightly less good in this department we still feel the cartridge to have very good timbre reproduction. But if there is a cartridge like the DDT II special that has a spot on right timbre richness and you put in a system when there is going to be a detraction of this parameter you will end up saying the cartridge has a lack in this department. And most of the time cables have an extremely hard time reproducing timbre reality. I think is the major shortcomings in cables. Only very few cables can do it acceptly well. But it is true that at the end of the day is the result that you are after, so in a normal sytuation you will feel what is not this cartridge shortcoming lack its weak point, but the cause will be your other components. But in my humble opinion I think the reason of this is simple: the other cartridges of the same price range and behond get more timbre richness adding colorations, It is not timbre but nice distortions filling the reproduct instument since when connected with hi end cable the DDT II special has surely better timbres.

This is a very, very solid product. You can get a lot out of this cartridge. And if you don't like it it means that you didn't make it sound right. This is not a cartridge that has a signature sound that you can love or hate. It sounds right.

The worst of all: this is what I really hate and you absolutely have to know before buying and using any VDH cartridge. They pass a time in a prison of acoustic misery. I tell you about it: you buy a VDH cartridge, any kind of it, I had Frog, Grasshoppers, Black Beauty and so on, and you put fresh new in your system and they sound very good. Then they keep on sounding this good for up to about 40 hours. When they get close to 40 hours strange things happen. The bass loose control, the treble becomes hard, they start being a little foggy and grey. The strangest of all, and happended to me with every VDH cartridge happens at about 38 hours. Few times you will hear like something went out of phase. But you check the speaker cables and they are OK. This phenomen is just the prelude of the acoustic misery of the 40 hours. Then you have to wait up until 160-170 hours for things to be better then they were at the beginning.
Why this happen and how do you explain it? I don't know. Maybe one day some close to the holland master will ask him about and we all know about it.
So when you think something wrong happened to your VDH cartridge be rassured. The worst is if you try or buy one that has 40 to 160 hours on. You will end up to very wrong conclusions about their musicality.

Last remark: this cartridge is an exceptional match for the Naim Aro. Aro owners now you know it.

If you don't have a lot of money to spend buying this cartridge you can be rassured you get 90% of what is there to get out from cartridges. If you want to believe somebody like me that owned more then 50 cartridges and listened and set up many more you could, but if it is not enough you should know some other people like me say the same thing about this cartridge. The only problem is they know you want to spend more and if they tell you to buy this you will say: it is just an entry level! Yes you are right. On the paper you are right. Just on the paper.

facebook page

I have just created a facebook account with this same name Hifible.
feel free to participate and share your experiences with the same materials I have written about or questions or whatever.

Wireworld Eclipse 7 interconnect

The beauty of the truth. This is the word I would like to use for this cable. The only thing that can go wrong with this is that the truth is not always beautiful...

I have heard different songs about wireworld products. And myself belonged to that part that didn't really know what to affirm about the sound expressed by this maker. That this maker has a wide knowledge and experience is certain, but that having experience always means you are a master I am not sure about it. I have a lot of experience in many fields and don't master any of them. But let put it short: the conceptor of Wireworld is a master in its art.

There is a consinstency of aproach and sound result in all its cables that is very rare. And the good point for us, the listeners is that the results are very predictable.
Let's start why some people would not like Wireworld cable:
the first dislike I have heard is that they sound a little cold in the high frequency. And this could be right. Please be careful that I said: could be right not that it is right. The second dislike is that they feel a little to composed not very free in the dynamic expression and this could be right too. (I am saing again could be right andd not that it is right).
So now the difference between when it could be right and how it is right.

I said it could be right becaus most of the time if not always we assembled our system in a compensatory way. So we have put some salt there, some peper ther and so on. When we instal a Wireworld cable all this dressing up is exposed. So if we had put some compress element to focalize more the sound and at the end we balanced this with a certain cable when we change for a Wireworld we will ear the dynamic compression of a certain element in our chain. But of course since you don't have either the experience or the will or the patience or many component s like I do or other people have, you would end up saying the Wireworld is a little compressed or cold in the higher frequency.

The best thing to understand Wireworld cable is to assemble a system where you change everything except the cables. So I keep in this case the Eclipse 7 between my CD player and my pre phoono and between the amp and the pre and when I don't like sonething I don't change a cable but another component. If I do this way, once I reached the right balance my system is generally very well balanced, transparent, dynamically open, extremely clean but not cold.

I have found this out after many hours of playing with wireworld cables. They were exposing not themselves but what was happening behond themselves.
So what I can conclude is that Wireworld cables (I use this generically since their consistency) from Eclipse 7 to Platinum Eclipse 7 (I have tried all the models) are much closer to neutrality that any other cable on the market.
Of course the smaller one like the Equinox and down the line show some colorations but much less then same range competitors.

The only thing to anylize is: it is a good thing to be neutral? Yes, in an absolute sense of course. Let's put this question in another way: does my system need neutral cables to perform at its best?

The story can be long.
We like to get simple in reasoning expecially when we have to spend money on something, just to be sure we are not trowing them away.
Many times I have red and I have heard: you cannot get better then from the master recording. Are you sure?
I have got this one after many, many years. Yes you can get better then the master. You must be crazy you would say. How can you get better then the less degraded source you can have. The reasoning is simple and you should not have a brain block but just open it and allow to some thinking, expecially after having recorded many things. If you have done recording in studio or anywhere the first thing you notice when listening to it is that is way different from the original event. Whatever you do, any kind of mega star trek recorder you might have the recording is going to be different then the reality.
You have already lost things, parts, of the original. If everything you have is the most neutral you are going to get almost to the master recording with its original missing parts. Or you can try to fit in the lost parts things that make senses to restore the original message.
This is what a lot of extremely good compoments do, and that we often call magic.
There is only one thing that doesn't work with this method. It doesn't work for every lost message.
The components are not intelligent, so they add magic altering the recorded message. The thing is that the magic felt in a voice can be a sirop in a piano...

So I said that a perfectly neutral component can at the best give you back not the original message, but the recorded original message with its missing components already lost in the proceding of recording.
All this prelude is to make clear and to justify the two mainly differents approach of hifi components makers: let's make as less intrusive as possible, is the first, let's give beauty where there is not beauty any more.

For me both aproach are right. It means they are both very well defendable.

There are though for us few things to consider: where to use a "absent component" and where to use a "altering component" that brings to the game its own flavour.

Generally speaking a less expensive components never aims to perfect neutrality because for the limitation of its own design already is going to have a limited dynamic and timbric reproduction and so on. So we could say in this case would be better to bring to the game something that is not there so we should use not a perfectly neutral cable. I am not sure about it.
Generally speaking again, very expensive components tends to an absolute sound so they are as close to neutral as possible: it is absolutely not true since there is much more difference in reproduction from two very expensive components then from two lesser one.
So at this point we don't know what to do.

But it is simple: we don't have to stick with an idea. 

Our goal is to get out from our system the most emotional reproduction of the music we love.

OK so you have my position on neutrality.

If instead we have the concept of neutrality as a no distortions concept this is more interesting.
Nobody likes distortions but there are distortions that are pleasent and others that are extremely umpleasent.
So either you master the pleasent distortion or you try to get rid of the most distortion you can.

This is Wireworld approach.

This cable add much less distortions to the sound that you might think.

Its sound is solid; its images are well carved in a deep silence and depth is extremely well rendered as well large and agood in hight, and timbres are well diversified, not so beautiful as VDH silver 65, but the sound is more solid since its bass goes deeper.

This cable has it all except one thing that can be either of the most importance or the less importance: it doesn't add almost anything.

As my long prelude made clear this sometimes can give a not interesting sound. If your components give a result with enough salt no other cable can be better then this one in its price range, but if it is missing some beauty, some warmth, some expression, some timing, some kind of accent somewhere, it is not going to give you it to you.
It is something that fits exceptionally well the beauty holder.

I like this cable a lot, expecially since it makes clear what it is the weak point in your system. If you use this cable and your system sound a little slow, it means it is a little slow, if give you the impression of being to hi fi you know the kind of accentuated hights and medium high range it means your system is like this. But if your system is a work of balance due by a stroke of luck or by a wise combination of elements this is the cable your system will work very probably very well with.