Ramesh,

In our situation (NOS1, Mach III, more) I would never use the separate ground wire. It would, however, mimic industrial setups.

Otherwise, just trial some wild configurations and see whether you perceive differences. But I think without that trialling you will be satisfied and let it be.
Anyway, I will be following this ...

Peter

This topic has been moved to Cables (Community induced).

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=4283.0

Exactly. Without that smear removed we have no clue that it can exist (even in such amounts). For me, at first, it was just the woah what a great sound. But after getting back in my own Blaxius^2, it became apparent.

I hope that the waiting times won't be too long for people, and that some parts we may run out of fairly soon, will arrive in time (some parts come from the UK and it seems that all is stuck there).

Thank you for sharing, Arvind !
Peter

Hey Ramesh,

I can tell you in advance : I am the only one that I know of who posts in this forum, that uses the ET^2 in the setup you mention. I think people just don't trust it that this will make such a difference, but it really does.
And mind you, even for me it lasted for a year before I had the idea of having one made for myself and trying it.

I do know about 2 or 3 others using the ET^3 in such a set up, but as they don't post in forums I have no reflection of what their findings are.

At least all those with a NOS1 *and* some kind of 2-PC setup should blindly do this ... while nobody does. So a promise : the improvement is a kind of similar as a new Lush cable is, although this is merely about subtlety.

Btw, I don't want to sell cables. Haha.

Best regards,
Peter

Hi Robert - I miss something of an equation ? Thus, relationship with what ? (with "these settings" on one side)

If you mean the smear, well, it is just a less accurate "pass through" of the signal. Say that all which is less accurate, thus smears (roam off the peaks and valleys - literally smear those). How that works ? haha, my secret. But the 1,1,1 works out like it does on very explicit purpose (read : I could expect it to work out like it does before I created it).

Now, in combination with the also ultimately more accurate Blaxius^2.5 (at least how that comes to my ears) it has become too much of it. My reasoning : digital is still digital and we may perceive it like that.
Remember how the Lush emerged : it explicitly does not comply to the USB standard (with the Clairixa at the other end of the spectrum - it does as good as possible). How does it sound ? ... analogue.

It takes a couple of years to work it all out but we will get there. Slowly ...

Peter

Ramesh, All, I completely forgot to add this :

At some stage Anthony's cables had to go, but mine were not ready yet. So for a small week I did exactly the same intuitively : I applied A:B-W, B:B-W just like you. And indeed I recognize some of the nature of the ^2.5 with the Green wire only.
Then, when the days passed, I more and more observed the "smear" now appearing. But notice that this is relative to the ultra clean not-smearing-at-all sound of the ^2.5.

Let me again refer to my Q3,4,5 now all at 0, which adds smear (yea, really). Thus them all at 1 does the opposite but in a fashion of (sort of) too much. It slightly takes out musicality. This is how I referred to the spell of Manfred Mann.
Btw, I suppose that more combinations are possible for the better, thinking of Q3,4,5 settings. But at this time I have no experience with that, or I forgot ...

Peter

... and one of the very few which is available in superb quality 24/192 (DVD Audio).

Hi Ramesh,

No, length doesn't matter a thing. It shouldn't for it's capacity (as in bandwidth over length), plus I thus coincidentally used those 7m's from Anthony while my own are 3.5m. Really no difference that I noticed. But then again, its their prospectus. You could even use 100m (but you won't be able to find someone making those - haha).


Peter

Yes, Robert, great stuff. Thanks !
Peter

Robert, good question !!
I changed that in my Sig yesterday, because, well, I found it in there at checking things (at 1 while my Sig said 0). Maybe that is not good at all ! But ... I suppose I am listening to that for "months" ? ... So I better let it be.

Arc Prediction with the Lush^3 is too much of it. Things are wildly "sharp" (which is good) but also tiring fairly quickly (not good). And with the Blaxius^2.5 that is even more "too much" (I tried Arc Prediction 2 days ago once again, because now Q3,4,5 at 0 but it did not last one track).

Regards,
Peter

Hahaha, I wasn't sure whether you'd felt OK if I mentioned it was you. I thought : "Anthony will speak up if he likes to". And so you did (as expected ).

Now everybody knows it is you, everybody will also know that I made a bit fun of the story behind it. Well, actually simply because I really had this fun. How could I ever expect the result to be so "outrageous".

Btw, I did not tell (but it is in my Sig by now) :
A:B-G, B:B-G
(Green is the new wire)

This config stems from the initial trial whether the wire would work in the first place (to be tested without screens (shields)). So I never even tried anything else. There's suddenly soo much fun in listening (not that there wasn't already).

So Anthony, thank you man - just for being persistent ! (and for being a great customer of course)
Peter

Allll Right !

I never waited so long for the announcement of a best ever "upgrade". Yes, with "best ever" I mean that. Better than a Lush^3, better than a Mach III and the impact of NOS1a/G3 upgrades I don't even remember any more.
It is the sheer lack of rest / time that prohibited me from writing this post. But here now finally goes.

10 weeks ago there was the bloke over in Australia who wanted more than what we had. And again, the title of this board applied. Community induced Cables. The so-maniest cable emerged - the Blaxius^2.5.
is that ?

The bloke in question wanted more shielding. Say a Blaxius^3. But like with the Lush^3, I didn't know how to make it. There would be no fitting screens and sleeves available, or it would be something terribly clunky, not based on the Blaxius at all and thus also without the experience. That would not be the way to go.
Australian could be known for being persistent and he just kept on "nagging" to (re)think it over. So I (say) had to.

And then on this day some 10 weeks ago, I suddenly saw the light. But the light sprung from a strange quite different thought : how to exploit the 3 shields of the Blaxius^2 in a fashion that they also could be used freely, like with e.g. the Lush^2. So let's remember, a coax cable like the Blaxius always requires one screen at least (but normally *the* screen) because else there is no ground-return connection.
And then I did something what I would deem a kind of "illegal" and I added a ground wire. Sufficient to say that it was the highest quality wire in combination with desired gauge (think about the higher level currents) we had laying around and in went the oxygen free 10 or so euro/meter additional wire.
I will leave it to your imagination how exactly.

That first day, out went my 3.5 meters own interlink on one side only, and it was replaced by the 7 meters the customer had ordered. The other one was not ready anyway, and I envisioned an audible difference between left and right. OK, not really, but why not try it if the other one would be ready the next day anyway. The real reason was : possibly it would not even work. "Work" is a big word in this context, but notice how easy it is for an interlink that is not properly constructed, to catch something and hum.

A coax cable like coax should NOT be connected.
What crazy comes up with something like this.


Well, with the two different cables in use (Blaxius^2 and Blaxius^2.5) the difference was out-ra-ge-ous. Walking from the left to the right (at 10 meters distance, the speakers being 6 meters or so apart), it was the most audible how way more "dull" the old cable sounded compared to the new one.

The next day, two cables in, I was so much flabbergasted that I, well, should have written this post right that moment. Many times I thought about doing it (the days after) but it just did not happen.

The next 4 weeks or so there was no time for having new interlinks myself, because the same guy from Australia kept us busy for literally weeks. Anecdotal would be that the number of meters of Blaxius^2.5 were a kind of countless, that the supplier did not have the extra sleeve which would be required (other than a month or so later) and that someone here started counting and counting, and calculated in advance that if all would be right, 10cm would be left after preparing the cables that eventually shipped in a box larger than 1,5 the size of a Mach III box. And that 10cm indeed was left in the end !! Amazing.
But my luck was : I had the 2x 7m of interlink from the Australian and I am not sure whether I asked if it would be allowed to break them in for a couple of weeks. Anyway, I used them happily.

After the big box(es) were out, a pair for myself was created, and they too obviously worked well. They still do.

Compared to the Blaxius^2 the sound is infinitely less smeared (was it then ?) and way way "shorter" at sounds of which you'd expect them to be short (e.g. a closed hi-hat). At the same time what should be longer was way longer (cymbal), and the whole of everything was transformed to something like an other dimension.

Possibly the no real description took me longer to post about it ? ... It is a bit like the NOS1 and its first USB interface - from then on nobody could describe its sound. This is the "sound" of the Blaxius^2.5 to some extent. No-sound.

But this was not all ...

I think that most people will use Q3,4,5 at 1,1,1. Well, a week ago I suddenly heard how that now could go. This too is difficult to explain, but I'd say that everybody who uses 1,1,1, will know why he does that. And I now heard that it was not "necessary" any more.
And THAT beat all ...

I recall that last Sunday I was playing all the famous songs from Manfred Mann's Earth Band. Man, the sheer spell coming from that now ... I apparently never heard how it has been intended ?

The highs are extraordinary, the color of the drums is no less than beautiful, and e.g. the snare is such an instrument that requires this "shortness" or otherwise it exhibits distortion (it is a most difficult instrument to begin with, of course).
Voices are unbelievable bright. Or clear, would be the better word.

Would one even the slightest think "should I replace my Blaxius^2 with the ^2.5 then ?!?:. The answer is an immediate Yes. And not because we are out of $. You won't be sorry by guarantee.

Edit : I removed a confusing text here.

Peter

PS: For now I left the price of the Blaxius^2.5 unchanged compared to the Blaxius^2. The Blaxius^2 won't be produced any more; the ^2.5 can sound exactly the same as the ^2 if you'd want that.

Anthony, yes good one. But mine is still W7 and I don't think it will happen there.

Peter

Hi Tore,

I would need to test that. I just Prepared a couple of albums and tonight I will try. But I think it is fine ...

Regards,
Peter