Sounds are being suspended out in front of me. I generally always have the 3D+ & X Bass switches ON. I have alsoīeen using an iFI Micro iDSD Signature. For this review, I have obviouslly been using an Audeze LCD-2F. My entire catalog for the very first time. In conclusion, both these cables have significantly enhanced my listening experience. I'm not sure why anyone would take Cuprum over Magnus, since they're the same grade copper. It's also the most beautiful cable I have ever Is the best 'bang for your buck' cable on the market by a long shot. But now Magnus, for only $50 more, with more than 3X the copper, Before Magnus, Cuprum was likely the best 'bang for your buck'Ĭable on the market starting at $250. I'm not sure any cable manufactuer has even attempted a headphoneĬable with as much 'metal' as Magnus. This technology,Īs far as I know, is pretty new. I question whether the original artists have even heard their own music in this way. To people that listen to very geometrical music, such as, Autechre, Matmos, Richard Devine,Īphex Twin, Phoenecia, Qebrus, BOC, Squarepusher, Etc. Despite the clear, holographic picture,ħN grade cables can create with the appropriate headphones, this may matter significantly more Structure of the bell, the more resonant the bell sounds. Reproduction, since we already know this to be true for casting bells. Scientifically it makes sense that crystalline structures that are more orderly will produce clearer sound Was I hallucinating this seemingly enormous difference? Was it a matter of what music I/they listen to? I was quite shocked by how much of an improvement, Cuprum & Magnus, were, over my stock cable. Given that most youtube reviewers seem luke warm to dead cold on cables, as a novice audiophile, I don't think it would be clear which was the more expensive headphone Regardless of whether this is absurd or not, I still feel like my drivers were being neutered by Audeze's stock cable.Įven if one strapped the $599 Audeze Premium cable on the Audeze LCD-XF, I don't think it would outperformĪn Audeze LCD-2F with Magnus. That I doubt that an LCD-XF with it's stock cable, would outperform an LCD-2F with Cuprum Or Magnus. Magnus is definitely more holographic than Cuprum.Įven with no burn in, I could easily tell, side by side, Magnus gives a bit more shape & texture to sounds than Cuprum.Īlso, due to it's larger image, Magnus also seems to have a tad bit more resolution than Cuprum.Īnd Cuprum's resolution / sound separation, was such an improvement over Audeze's stock cable, Magnus kinda makes Cuprum feel like an IEM cable in comparison. It might not feel that much bigger, since theĮntire image is slightly bigger, presumably due to the roughly 3X the copper that Magnus has over Cuprum.Īlthough Cuprum may have changed my life a bit, since I had never experienced music before in this way before, Has, at least a 15% larger stage than Cuprum, if not more. In contrast, after 40 hours of burn in, the cryogenically treated 4 X 18 Awg 7N OCC copper Magnus, With Cuprum, sheets of synthesized swooshes, now shred effortlessly through the entire soundstage, withĪ 3 dimensional texture & shape, I had never experienced before listening to music up until this point. To how an intercom at school sounds horrible because all the sounds seem be smooshed into one flattened space. Since each individual sound occupies a different space in the 3D shape within the 3D soundstage, in contrast This is where I noticed that increased layering decreases harshness Everything Ooozes like it's a smooth creamy liquid Sounds like a knife cutting through hot butter. After ~350 hours burn in, the cryogenically treated 8 X 26 Awg 7N OCC copper Cuprum,
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |