Opinions Wanted: AudioQuest vs Monster Cable Speaker Cables
Vincent Poy
I would like opinions regarding the following Speaker Cables and
how would you rate them compared to the others:
1) Original Monster Cable 10 guage? stranded round cable
2) Monster Cable XP 16 awg stranded flat cable
3) AudioQuest F-14 17 awg flat cable
4) AudioQuest F-18 14 awg flat cable
5) AudioQuest Type 2 15 awg round cable
6) AudioQuest Type 4 15 awg round cable
Does the type of copper play any role in the quality of the cable?
Thanks...
Cheers,
Vince
E-mail:hi...@mercury.sfsu.edu, \|/ System Adm - CircleStar Technologies, Inc.
ro...@berkeley.circlestar.com,(o o) San Francisco, California USA
_________________________oOO__(_)__OOo_____________________________
| There are many forms of science but only physics is the quantum |
| leap of the 21st Century. |
\_________________________________________________________________/
uP...@physics.ucla.edu UCLA Physics
le...@CERF.NET Los Angeles, California USA
ro...@ucla.circlestar.com
Vincent Poy
ARL Arnie <arla...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <30vnh7$g...@news.csus.edu>, hi...@mercury.sfsu.edu (Vincent Poy)
>wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like opinions regarding the following Speaker Cables and
>> how would you rate them compared to the others:
>>
>> 1) Original Monster Cable 10 guage? stranded round cable
>> 2) Monster Cable XP 16 awg stranded flat cable
>> 3) AudioQuest F-14 17 awg flat cable
>> 4) AudioQuest F-18 14 awg flat cable
>> 5) AudioQuest Type 2 15 awg round cable
>> 6) AudioQuest Type 4 15 awg round cable
>>
>> Does the type of copper play any role in the quality of the cable?
>
>think bigger differences are to be had when comparing Monster 10gg to AQ
>F14, which sould both be around $.70/ft. In my personal experience, I have
>found that either one of these are decent cables, and their sound or
>difference therein is more dependant on what amp and speakers you are
>using. I would recommend trying one cable from Monster and one from AQ at
>approx the same price, in your system, and go back and forth.
>
>Later,
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Arnie C.
>Accutronics
>Ann Arbor, MI
>e-mail: arla...@aol.com
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks... Actually the Monster Cable XP 16 guage which I have now is
$0.50 a foot and the F-14 is $0.85 while the Monster 10 gauge is $1.25.
high-end dealers seems to tell me that the AudioQuest is better for mids
and highs while the Monster is better for bass, which is more important
in audio and like if i had real good speakers, would the cable effect
the sound quality? It's just that it seems I don't hear anyone using
Monster Cable except for the Sigma and everyone else seems to rave about
AudioQuest's type IV cable. Thanks..
AFL GeneS
Poy) writes:
> Thanks... Actually the Monster Cable XP 16 guage which I have now is
> $0.50 a foot and the F-14 is $0.85 while the Monster 10 gauge is $1.25.
> high-end dealers seems to tell me that the AudioQuest is better for mids
> and highs while the Monster is better for bass, which is more important
> in audio and like if i had real good speakers, would the cable effect
> the sound quality? It's just that it seems I don't hear anyone using
> Monster Cable except for the Sigma and everyone else seems to rave about
> AudioQuest's type IV cable. Thanks..
If you think the quality of bass is somehow being affected by switching
cables, enjoy. (It's not.)
Peace,
Gene
LunaGroup
GeneS) writes:
Gee, Gene--thanks for telling what I really hear. How did you do
that--connecting into my brain like that--good trick.
When I first tried AQ F-14 in my home stereo, I had my doubts about it
being good at all. It is (physically) tiny compared to the 10 ga. Monster
that it replaced. And it was LESS expensive. (I hope those of you who
constantly harping on these points are reading this). It made, in my
estimation, a NIGHT AND DAY difference!! It's effects have also been
heard, right away, by no less than four of my friends when I installed it
in their systems. They all doubted it was possible for a mere wire to
have ANY effect at all. Two of these friends were receiving this wire as
a gift from me, and they each told me afterwards that they were mystified
and disappointed UNTIL they heard the difference. Now they say that my
gift has enhanced their entire music collection and they own enjoyment of
it.
I hope that those of you who might be interested read the three parts of
the August Stereophile that pertain to double blind testing: the As We See
It column, the sidebar by Wes Phillips accompanying the 8 speaker (blind)
test, and the letter from reader Chuck Butler.
Neil
JAC@wrlc
>
> When I first tried AQ F-14 in my home stereo, I had my doubts about it
> being good at all. It is (physically) tiny compared to the 10 ga. Monster
> that it replaced. And it was LESS expensive. (I hope those of you who
> constantly harping on these points are reading this). It made, in my
> estimation, a NIGHT AND DAY difference!! It's effects have also been
> heard, right away, by no less than four of my friends when I installed it
> in their systems.
If you creamed your jeans over AQ's F-14 just think what really GOOD
cable could do for you! Like Canare 4S8.
AFL GeneS
(LunaGroup) writes:
> When I first tried AQ F-14 in my home stereo, I had my doubts about it
> being good at all. It is (physically) tiny compared to the 10 ga.
> Monster that it replaced. And it was LESS expensive. (I hope those of
> you who constantly harping on these points are reading this). It made,
> in my estimation, a NIGHT AND DAY difference!! It's effects have also
> been heard, right away, by no less than four of my friends when I
> installed it in their systems. They all doubted it was possible for a
> mere wire to have ANY effect at all. Two of these friends were
> receiving this wire as a gift from me, and they each told me afterwards
> that they were mystified and disappointed UNTIL they heard the
> difference. Now they say that my gift has enhanced their entire music
> collection and they own enjoyment of it.
Unless you tested this with the identity of the cables hidden (and having
someone switch between the two without knowing which one was being
activated), I would tend to discount this as nothing more than anecdotal,
unproven claims (the newest product almost always sounds better than the
old). That is assuming the cable itself is not poorly designed and causing
signal loss, which would make an audible difference.
Peace,
Gene
Vincent Poy
ARL Arnie <arla...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <311j5u$8...@news.csus.edu>, hi...@mercury.sfsu.edu (Vincent Poy)
>wrote:
>
>> $0.50 a foot and the F-14 is $0.85 while the Monster 10 gauge is $1.25.
>> high-end dealers seems to tell me that the AudioQuest is better for mids
>> and highs while the Monster is better for bass, which is more important
>> in audio and like if i had real good speakers, would the cable effect
>> the sound quality? It's just that it seems I don't hear anyone using
>> Monster Cable except for the Sigma and everyone else seems to rave about
>> AudioQuest's type IV cable. Thanks..
>
>
>experience, AQ type IV cable has better highs and mids, and the Monster
>10gg has "better" bass. "Better" of course is subjective to some extent.
>I do find that Monster 10gg gives "tighter" bass, with more definition that
>AQ Type IV. I also find that the highs on Monster Cables tend towards
>harshness and lack of definition. Actually, I have had good results
>bi-wiring with AQ IV for the highs and Monster for the lows.
>
Hmmm, like the Monster Cable XP I have now, are they any good at
all or are they simply not worth it and I would be better off with lamp
cord? Also, are Monsters cables very detailed?
>As for the quality of speakers, if you ask me, the higher the quality of
>the speakers, the more differences you will hear.
>
I thought the Speakers were more important than the wires since
it is the Speakers that you are paying big money for and how can you
make a good speaker bad by using different cables that are designed for
speakers?
>BTW Vince, UCLA Physics huh? What field are you in?
>
Yep, UCLA Physics. I'm a Undergraduate so I'm still uncertain what
field to get in. any suggestions?
>Later,
>
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Arnie C.
>Accutronics
>Ann Arbor, MI
>e-mail: arla...@aol.com
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARL Arnie
> > When I first tried AQ F-14 in my home stereo, I had my doubts about it
> > being good at all. It is (physically) tiny compared to the 10 ga.
> > Monster that it replaced. And it was LESS expensive. (I hope those of
> > you who constantly harping on these points are reading this). It made,
> > in my estimation, a NIGHT AND DAY difference!!
Gene writes:
> Unless you tested this with the identity of the cables hidden (and having
> someone switch between the two without knowing which one was being
> activated), I would tend to discount this as nothing more than anecdotal,
> unproven claims (the newest product almost always sounds better than the
> old). That is assuming the cable itself is not poorly designed and causing
> signal loss, which would make an audible difference.
I write:
Yeah, Yeah. I think it's getting a little old. This was cheap cable, it
changed the sound, and they LIKED it. So what? why should they worry
about "identity delusion"? I hear of this type of experience at least once
a day, everyday. I read Gene's statements in the Audio Critic once a month
or two, or three. If your two year old stereo sounds different in a
pleasing manner for at least another year, and gets you pulling out CD's
you haven't listened to in a year, the money spent on the AQ F14 was well
worth it. If you were buying Kimber AG24kt for $15,000 per 5ft pair to
connect to Bose 301 speakers, I'd say you were wasting your money, and
probably something like "You Tweako NUT!"
BTW, I only like AQ F14 in SOME systems. In a big speaker, high power
system, I like Monster 10gg better. In a medium to small speaker, 50-100
watt system, especially with bright speakers, I like AQ F14 better.
AFL GeneS
arla...@aol.com (ARL Arnie) writes:
> BTW, I only like AQ F14 in SOME systems. In a big speaker, high power
> system, I like Monster 10gg better. In a medium to small speaker,
> 50-100 watt system, especially with bright speakers, I like AQ F14
> better.
So long as we consider your statement for what it is, anecdotal without
any supporting evidence, you are entitled to feel as you wish.
Peace,
Gene
AFL GeneS
arla...@aol.com (ARL Arnie) writes:
> Oh, and you know that for a FACT?
Arnie, kindly describe the mechanism by which bass is altered in a cable
(and what kind of alteration there is--frequency response, distortion,
what?), and also what evidence exists to demonstrate that such a
difference is possible. And please don't cite an unverified listening test
as proof of anything.
Peace,
Gene
ARL Arnie
wrote:
> Arnie, kindly describe the mechanism by which bass is altered in a cable
> (and what kind of alteration there is--frequency response, distortion,
> what?), and also what evidence exists to demonstrate that such a
> difference is possible. And please don't cite an unverified listening test
> as proof of anything.
I wonder, has any one conducted a blind AB test, comparing Audio Quest Type
4 speaker cable to Monster 10gg? I mean by a magazine or a test overseen
by someone form AES or something. I have, and many people I know have, but
obviously this is "unverified". It is my personal opinion based on
personal experience that these two cables cause quite different bass
reproduction in some systems. I am not stating this as proof of anything.
The "proof", in my opinion, is for the listener to decide on.
ARL Arnie
wrote:
>
Yeah, Yeah. Lay off. Notice I used the words "I like" and "I prefer",
not "there is" or "it was better". At least my comments tell people
something about my preferences, and they can take it as they wish. There
may be no supporting evidence from blind AB tests, but the numerous posts
from people preffering one cable over an other must mean something.
ARL Arnie
wrote:
> If you think the quality of bass is somehow being affected by switching
> cables, enjoy. (It's not.)
Oh, and you know that for a FACT?
Later,
Arnie
Vincent Poy
ARL Arnie <arla...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <31495o$a...@news.csus.edu>, hi...@mercury.sfsu.edu (Vincent Poy)
>wrote:
>
>> all or are they simply not worth it and I would be better off with lamp
>> cord? Also, are Monsters cables very detailed?
>
>
>Lamp cord is generally not as good. For the money, Monster XP is well
>worth it in my opinion.
>
Hmmm, as I understand it, Monster also makes a Monster Cable
XPHP which is between the XP and Original, I wonder if the XPHP is
better than the Original since the XPHP uses Time Correct stranding and
the Original doesn't. You have to go with the New Monster to get that.
What is Time Correct stranding and does it affect the sound quality?
>Now, would another cable like AQ F14 sound better? IMO, if you listen to
>music with REAL instruments and people's voices, yes. If you listen to
>pop, rock, and country type stuff, Monster will probably sound better.
>(Hey, I listen to country sometimes too.)
>
Hmmm, I guess so but I sometimes want to listen to classical.
It seems pretty good too.. Actually it seems like it's still the
speakers. :-)
>> >As for the quality of speakers, if you ask me, the higher the quality of
>> >the speakers, the more differences you will hear.
>> >
>>
>> I thought the Speakers were more important than the wires since
>> it is the Speakers that you are paying big money for and how can you
>> make a good speaker bad by using different cables that are designed for
>> speakers?
>
>
>I would strongly agree that the speakers are more important than the
>cables. I look at it as: it's a matter of "allowing" the speaker to
>sound as good as it can. Room placement, room treatment, and cable choice
>in my opinion are the three things (in that order) that "allow" speakers to
>sound as good as they are able. I would say don't spend more on any of the
>three than a speaker upgrade would cost.
>
>
Wow, but that would cost a fortune like for the cables... Never
knew why cables could cost more than a real component...
>> >BTW Vince, UCLA Physics huh? What field are you in?
>> >
>>
>> Yep, UCLA Physics. I'm a Undergraduate so I'm still uncertain what
>> field to get in. any suggestions?
>
>Solid State seems to be booming, if that's possible in a field of Physics.
>OR, with a degree, you could design and build expensive speaker cables,
>have people like the Audio Critic up your butt, and still make a lot of
>money.
>
>
What is Solid State anyways? I guess I can build speaker
cables but hehe, I rather build my own speakers first and maybe start
my own Audiogear company...
Visal Tanglertpaibul
>I wonder, has any one conducted a blind AB test, comparing Audio Quest Type
>4 speaker cable to Monster 10gg?
Is it matter? If the test does not detect any difference, you should try it
anyway because too many people hear it. If the test does detect some, then
you should try it anyway to see which one you like. So, bypass tests by
others, do the test your self. The key of testing for preference is "in your
system, in your listening room, by your ears".
Anyway, type 4 is a round dark blue cable about 1/3 inch in diameter. It look
too small behind big speakers. For big speaker, cable about the size of
garden hose may look better. I use the type 4, the sound is good but I don't
like the look.