zombie boy 2000
06-09-2006, 11:30 AM
I just thought I'd give a little write-up on my thoughts concerning the differences between Signal Cable's Analog One and Analog Two IC's. For the record, the Analog Two's have run from my pre-pro to amp in both cases -- the only change being in making the switch from One's to Two's between the source CDP and the HK avr240.
I learned a lesson here. Not all improvements are across the board. That is to say that where one might hear change for the better in a host of areas, other aspects might take a couple of steps back.
In this case, the Analog Two's excelled in nearly every area -- most noticably the midrange. The Two's seemed even more effortless than the One's (no small feat) -- with smaller details becoming even more apparent, and the dilineation of instruments more three-dimensional. Bass became noticably tighter. Electric guitar distortion actually achieved a musicality that I didn't think my system was capable of. Lucid, smooth, and relaxed are the words that come to mind.
However, a bit of "bite" was compromised in the transistion. The Analog One's really seemed to shine with acoustic guitar pieces -- showcasing plucks and strumming with bravado; everything sharp, alive and focused in this frequency range. Not that the Two's don't do this -- just not with the proficiency the One's exhibited.
It's quite possible this is the result of me mating a traditionally "warm-sounding" pre-pro with a like-minded amp, "smooth and relaxed" cables, and the more laid-back presentation of Polk speakers. Not necessarily overkill, if that's your bag (and it is mine).
Irregardless, the Analog Two's trump the One's in so many other areas, that this minor discrepancy is simply not worth fretting over. This is just my first time learning in this hobby that not all upgrades offer "blanket" improvements. Sometimes, you give a little, so you can take a lot.
Jason
I learned a lesson here. Not all improvements are across the board. That is to say that where one might hear change for the better in a host of areas, other aspects might take a couple of steps back.
In this case, the Analog Two's excelled in nearly every area -- most noticably the midrange. The Two's seemed even more effortless than the One's (no small feat) -- with smaller details becoming even more apparent, and the dilineation of instruments more three-dimensional. Bass became noticably tighter. Electric guitar distortion actually achieved a musicality that I didn't think my system was capable of. Lucid, smooth, and relaxed are the words that come to mind.
However, a bit of "bite" was compromised in the transistion. The Analog One's really seemed to shine with acoustic guitar pieces -- showcasing plucks and strumming with bravado; everything sharp, alive and focused in this frequency range. Not that the Two's don't do this -- just not with the proficiency the One's exhibited.
It's quite possible this is the result of me mating a traditionally "warm-sounding" pre-pro with a like-minded amp, "smooth and relaxed" cables, and the more laid-back presentation of Polk speakers. Not necessarily overkill, if that's your bag (and it is mine).
Irregardless, the Analog Two's trump the One's in so many other areas, that this minor discrepancy is simply not worth fretting over. This is just my first time learning in this hobby that not all upgrades offer "blanket" improvements. Sometimes, you give a little, so you can take a lot.
Jason