HiFi Basics Cables Gotham Cables

HiFi Basics IX: Cables - A Guide, or, do they make a difference?
Guide to Gotham Cables

The short answer is: Absolutely, and sometimes even profound. Below I shall detail some of my beliefs, and in so doing you will know well what I personally use:

InterConnects This is the most important Category. Almost all I write here are applicable to cables elsewhere in the playback chain. 

• Cables as Tone Controls Nothing illustrates the conundrum of audio "titration" more than cable swapping - we all do it, though there are people who believe cables make no difference (false, and forget them). The problem with the Cable Freak (many out there) is that he overdoes it, and swings too often between a craving for more "transparency/neutrality" and more warmth, not realizing the real problem lies elsewhere in his system. The solid state user and modern loudspeaker users (I include most audio reviewers in this group) are more susceptible, because their gears are more often than not on the sterile and "white" side, even unlistenable. Tube Users and Vintage Aficionados' fare better, and generally tend not to use very expensive cables (well, let us not forget they also tend to roll tubes like using tone controls). Advice: never spend too much on cables, but do have a few spares for swapping. Think of Cables as no more than Finishing Touches on a System (but they do make a difference).

• Red and White By this I mean the generic cables that come free with most electronics. These vary greatly in quality, but they all have one thing in common - reasonable, even good delivery of midrange - but on the down side they are invariably deficient in treble and bass extension, and certainly not very dynamic at all. A huge army of cable "objectivists" believe that is all you need since they are indistinguishable from more expensive cables. Not so, but one should not laugh too hard. Why? Because many expensive cables that manipulate the sound sound worse. At least these cables are forgiving, whereas many "boutique" and "artisan" (an overused word, usually employed to justify high price, that I detest) cables are highly unmusical.

• Audiophile Cable Companies Basically, like most companies that offer accessories and tweaking devices (most are lousy), the audiophile cable companies capitalize on system anomalies (the more expensive, the more so)! The jargons used and the false promises are almost criminal. I also really do not believe audio magazines (trade or net) should review a lot of cables, as it is so system dependent. It is also worth noting that there is little objective measurements on cables (even Stereophile does not offer any measurements, not even a mention of capacitance and resistance etc). As in much of hifi, the few measurement parameters are hardly adequate. Two cables of close resistance or capacitance are likely to sound very different. In HK I have heard many expensive cables (top of the line Siltech and Oracle, for example) in many expensive systems (especially at dealers), but I cannot say that they offer anything special. In fact, they more often than not make the systems too colored. Just to name a few, Siltech, Nordost, Cardas, VdH, Audioquest etc, I have heard a lot of them and generally I do not like them. Ditto MIT, Oracle etc, but their resistor networks (which I'd rather not have) fare a little better. Haven't you noticed one thing? The cable marketing is detestably basically "the bigger the better", so as they get more expensive, the fatter and heavier they get. That means all kinds of extraneous and unwanted materials get into the cable, just to impress you. What has that got to do with "straight wire with gain"? Weird Geometries Many high end cables employ conductors of different AWG and unusual geometry. Were you to terminate yourself, you'd be lost as to what strand to use for what. I definitely frown upon this, as this goes against the simple is best (not science perhaps, but a good philosophy for so many things) rule and, not surprisingly, this kind of manipulation is almost the exclusive provenance of the hifi world. If you look at respectable professional cables (below), they don't do this at all.   

• Professional Cables Although the different Professional Cables sound different (think Gotham vs Mogami vs Belden), the companies honestly strive for truthful reproduction, including neutrality and transparency (unlike hifi cable companies), or a balance thereof, and so are within a safety envelope, and one can use the differences between professional cables to adjust one's system. This also illustrates that, best intention notwithstanding, there is no one definition of neutrality or transparency (same with recording engineers). The professional cable companies also give clear specifications for their products, something the audiophile cable sector just largely ignores. For myself, I'd be happy to use mostly Gotham Cables, because within this family different models sound somewhat different, and the differences can be exploited (the "Size" Bullet below lists the models I use). I have three large systems and multiple sources, and they are all wired almost exclusively with Gotham. Even so, occasionally I do have to use something else, like Mogami or DIY "47 Labs".

• "Western Electric"/Vintage These are cloth types and there are many variations. Most of them are not optimal, but really old high AWG tin-plated solid cores that have an insulating layer that has to be scraped off are very good. These can be very detailed, and too much cannot be used at once.

• Constructing Cables Given the success I have had with Professional Cables, I find it largely unnecessary to construct cables, by which I mean making whole cables, not just soldering the connectors (except for a few pairs using antique WE material, which have their own sound). This is actually a whole other world, and many, including a few friends, spend a huge amount of time trying different conductors and other materials, time better spent listening to music. Take the most popular, CAT 5, yes, I have listened to many, some with heavy braiding, but while they sound reasonable the professional cables are better.

• Copper Cables Copper is basically the standard, and cannot be easily surpassed, not by silver, and you can forget about gold. Copper is good as is. Silver plating makes it worse - avoid. The "surprise" is, older tin-plated copper usually sound pretty good. I am sure that is heresy to many, so take it with a grain of salt.

• Silver Cables More often than not, silver sounds paler and inferior to copper cables. I actually have quite a few old ones lying around. The only one I still employ from time to time, and can recommend, is Kimber KCAG, which has a very simple geometry and very neutral sound (the connector is also excellent). I have two old Audio Note silver cables (made in Japan, before the schism) that sound quite good (AN-S and AN-V), but both can be a little pale and indeed not quite neutral. These are likely more like the Kondo cables now. I have also heard some current AN UK silver cables; at my friend WSS' place, I prefer my Gotham cables.

• Size In general, the softer the cable, the better the sound (think of the softness of Gotham, even Mogami, less so Belden). Don't you think the better the copper, the softer it is? I believe the thicker the diameter, the more colored the sound (think NBS, Cardas etc). Size can be due to many things. Number of Conductors I don't like a large number of conductors. Two conductors (e.g. Gotham GAC-2, GAC-1 Ultra Pro), Four Conductors (e.g. Gotham GAC-2111, "EMT replica", GAC-4, both used 2+2), and often just One Conductor (e.g., my beloved coaxial Gotham DGS-1; using the shield as the other conductor) work well for me in all three of my systems. AWG the size of each conductor matters a lot. I prefer smaller conductors (higher AWG numbers), 22-24 usually working the best in my book. Shielding I don't like heavily shielded cables, as even non-shielded cables work well in my systems. Most Gotham's, being professional, have non-intrusive (soft) shielding (and good shielding at that). Insulation and Dielectric Material The more of these used, the worse the sound.

• Stranded vs Solid Core For my taste, stranded is almost always better. Stranded has better and more even frequency response (why professional cables use them), important for classical music replay, while solid core projects the midrange more, which is why certain audiophiles prefer them. It should be noted CAT 5 is solid core. The larger the core diameter, the more imprecise the sound (which is why 47 Labs solid core is of very high AWG), though some may like it because because of a perceived gain in impact.

• Length Shorter lengths sound less relaxed. 1.5 - 2 meters is the usual recommendation. Longer interconnects are usually frowned upon, but many of us use them. For me, I like to have my preamp in front of or next to me, which means a longer interconnect to the amp. The deficiencies of longer lengths are mildly subtractive in nature, sometimes perhaps even beneficial and, most importantly, can be easily made up elsewhere. I don't understand audiophiles who use short cables, and struggle to connect every time they swap components. If cables make you use swear words, that is not a life. Unfortunately, that is true of too many audiophiles.

• Connectors RCA Let's face it, there is NO perfect RCA plug for all seasons, especially for vintage users who are often faced with tightly spaced connectors. For me, the plug should be small and utilize a minimal amount of metal, like Switchcraft and similar Neutrik/Rean look-alikes (Amphenol is OK too). Bullet Plug is great but not for me as it will ruin vintage connectors. Chunky connectors I do not like (I for one dispute WBT sounds good, and I own several sets)! They are made to accommodate all the extraneous layers of unwelcome elements of thick cables. Why have a cable with internally small gauged conductors end up in a massive block of metal? It is idiotic. XLR In many ways I can relate to XLR connectors, which are by nature chunky (yet their elements that actually make contact are not chunky), more than chunky and shiny RCA connectors. A simple and good quality Neutrix (or Switchcraft or whatever) is better quality than many over-priced chunky RCA connectors. You figure.

Loudspeaker Cables In general, in terms of cable construction, my preferences for these are much like mine for interconnects. Forget stiff, unwieldy cables. Opt for fewer conductors, stranded, professional, copper, straightforward geometry. Some concerns particular for loudspeaker cables:

• Bare Wire Given the proper binding post, I believe bare wire sounds better. The more efficient the loudspeaker, the more bare wires of high AWG (thin) sound good. And bare wire connection is easier for users of vintage gear. My favorite is Belden 9497 and I connect it bare on both sides. "Western Electric" These cloth type cables are popular with horn and vintage enthusiasts, but most of them are not good. Tinning with Solder Some people like tinning the end with a little solder, but I don't like this - while it keeps the strands together, the contact is actually less good than just wire alone (though fraying is an issue).

• Thin vs Thicker Cables It is my opinion thicker cables with larger or more conductors usually do not sound as good. This is evidenced by my use of Gotham: over the years, in most applications and with most smaller loudspeakers the Gotham 50010 and 50025 sounded better than the thickest 50040 (10/25/40 are diameters), with better agility, resolution and clarity. Another memory lingers in the mind: with the LS3/5A, the Kimber 4TC sounds a lot better than the 8TC. Current Demands This is the exception. If I run less efficient loudspeakers like ATC or Magnepan, the 50040 would fare better, more composure and dynamics due to better current delivery. Here a Belden 9497 still sounds very good tonally, but you can tell it is reined in (however, better that than runaway, which is how a lot of audiophile cables sound).

• Bi-Wire? This is controversial - many are adamant that a "better" Single Wire Cable + Jumpers are better than a bi-wire cable. I don't hear it that way. Grant you, I agree, in many instances, especially smaller loudspeakers, bi-wire is a gimmick, but I have quite extensive experience with larger or more inefficient loudspeakers, where bi-wire is simply more dynamic. This is true of the B&W Matrix 801 Mk II, Spendor SP-100 (it is actually tri-wire, so use jumpers between the tweeter and midrange inputs), Harbeth LS5/12 (magnificent!) and Magnepan. My favorite bi-wire cable is the Belden 1810A. Jumpers Should you have to use jumpers, you must replace the lousy ones that come stock - they are woefully bad. I myself use a short run of loudspeaker cable, particularly the Belden 9497.

• Spade vs Banana I abhor spades and use basically bare wires or Bananas. I shake my head when I see audiophiles fasten a thick spade with a wrench. Banana Connector The best is the BFA type (see pic). BFA stand for British Federation of Audio, and Linn uses this for their amplifiers. To me, the merit of this is the thin and curled copper sleeve, ensuring maximal contact. I use the so-called Nakamichi (Chinese), which are convenient screw-on types, but it would be perhaps even better to use just the copper sleeve without a connecting block (available cheaply on Ebay) and wrap a heat-shrink around it. Vintage Connection Short of bare wire, banana is still better than spades for vintage amps with their screw-on terminals. I use the small 5 mm fork adaptor pictured.

Digital Cables These too make a great difference in sound. Again, most of the observations on interconnects apply. At my peak I ran several digital systems using my Genesis Digital Lens as Switchboard, and have tried out many. For DAC's that can accept many different inputs, one can switch for fun, but if you ask me there is no significant superiority when it comes to XLR vs RCA/BNC.

• RCA/Coaxial/S/PDIF This is the most common Input. I use solely professional cables, usually the incomparable Belden 1694A and sometimes the Gotham GAC-1 (10070; not to be confused with the GAC-1 interconnect, 10001). Coaxial vs USB Incidentally, whenever I compare, the Coaxial sounds better to me.

• BNC This is always a problem. Some manufacturers (like ARC) regard it as superior to RCA and do not provide for the latter. I use an adaptor, as it is difficult to get proper BNC connectors that allow you to solder (I do not have crimping tools).

• AES/EBU Some regard this balanced connection as superior to RCA, but I am not so sure. I do use it. My favorite is Gotham GAC-2 (10601; not to be confused with Interconnect GAC-2, 10401). It is a very soft and thin cable. On the Sonic Frontier SFD-II Mk II, it sounds better than the GAC-1/10070.

• AT&T This is basically defunct now, but on older transports and DAC's (like the Sonic Frontier SFD-II, Theta Data etc) I find it superior. A common complaint is brightness, but not to this tube user!

• Optical This is definitely the least ideal of the digital cable formats. Generic ones really suck. The only one that I have found that sounds surprisingly good is the Van den Hull Optocoupler, an anomaly since I usually find anything from that company uninspiring/colored.

• USB Please refer to my Article on USB Cables.

• I2F Firewire There are several formats regarded by some as superior. I don't use them, but I have heard quite a few expensive setups employing these connections, none remotely musical.

Power Cords This for me is the last frontier, which I have not really explored. They do make a difference, but I think much less in magnitude than interconnects. I have heard and seem tons of expensive power cords and cannot help come away from the conclusion that most are colored, the bigger the more so. I myself would stick to my principles - softer cables, not too thick. One day I do intend to DIY a few more, including of course Gotham (which some of my fellow Gotham users endorse highly. Connectors I do use decent ones, but perhaps hospital grade is over-doing it.

Corollary/Postscript Perhaps the strongest persuasion for not using expensive cables is my own audition experience. Over the years I have heard at least hundreds of setups large and small (including dealers), cheap and expensive, yet there is one common observation: those who spend a lot on cables usually have the most unbalanced sound. That alone is proof enough that most cables mess up rather than improve the sound.

Elekit TU-8150, Almarro M1A, Dayton B652, JBL L20T, Micromega MyDAC

Dayton B652 on top of Almarro M1A. Click to enlarge.

Elekit TU-8150 (DX), Part III
Almarro M1A vs Dayton B652 vs JBL L20T
Review: JBL L20T, Part III
Review: Micromega MyDAC, Part III

*Elekit TU-8150: Part I (Basic Info; 6AQ5 vs 6V6), Part II (Pentode vs Triode; Input 1 vs 2), Part IV (Input 2 mod).

*JBL L20T: Part I (Basic Info), Part II (partnered by SMSL T-Amp, interesting contrast to partnership with Elekit).

*Micromega MyDAC: Part I (Basic Info and Test), Part II (loose ends, including desktop).

I didn't really want to switch out my big horns, but in the name of thoroughness, there was still ground to cover. I tried out other smaller loudspeakers for a glimpse into real-world compatibility, so as readers and potential buyers can judge for themselves.

Horses for Courses In so doing, I discovered that, due to the design, it was more complicated and time consuming than I anticipated and I had to re-think and even partly unlearn what I had found before. However, as a result, I learned more than I thought I would! Now, I am pleased.

Due to the issues involved (differences in gain structure between the 2 inputs, as well as the presence of an Op Amp preamp stage), the Listening Notes are organized a little differently from usual. Readers should cross-reference with Part II for best understanding.

For most of the listening I used my System II front-end: Sony XA5400ES CDP; Thorens TD-125/SME 3019i/Denon DL-304; Aurorasound Vida Phonoamp;  Shindo Monbrisson Full-Function Preamp. Cables are various Gotham for interconnects and Belden 9497 for loudspeakers.

Listening Notes

• The Reality of 2.9/1.6 Watts When it comes to such flea power, I probably have experienced more than most people, including SE fans. My own Sun Audio VT25/10 SET amp (estimated 1.5-2 Watts) worked reasonably well with my Klipsch La Scala. My 45 amp (estimated 2.5 Watts; DIY'ed by a friend) worked superbly well with both my La Scala and even Tannoy Canterbury. I have heard my friend's Sun Audio 6V6 SE amp work with his Altec 605, and another friend's Sun Audio 45 SET amp (same amp as the VT25/10, just slightly differently configured) work well with his Lowther. But certainly all flea powered amps are not all created equal, and the rated output power, like much else measured in hifi, is only an indicator. A 1.5 Watts Western Electric Push-Pull Amp, like the WE 46 (here) sounds a LOT more powerful than a SE(T) amp of equal or higher rating (the same also holds true of even higher powered SET amps - a Wavac or Verdier 300B sounds a whole lot more powerful than, say, a Spark 300B amp). Preamp For low-powered amps, it is usually highly desirable to have a preamp with good gain. You need all the help you can get for that first watt. Forget about "Straight Wire with Gain", or passive preamps (a TVC with gain may be an exception). So for most of the listening here I used my Shindo Preamp, and maxed out the volume of the TU-8150. Of course, the TU-8150 does have a preamp section in the form of an Op Amp, which makes things a little more complicated, as we shall explore. Volume Setting When used with a preamp, keep in mind that in the TU-8150 the volume pot is after the Op Amp, so it can be maximized when used as a power amp.

• Room Size and Effect For such flea-powered amp, I feel compelled to say something about my room, so as to put things in context. Mine is around 300 sq ft, large for small loudspeakers and low powered amp. However, as you can see in the pic, my bookshelves are in-room and near-field (my seat is right behind the Thorens TD-124 turntable), making it easier. Thus, the sound would have less bass than placement closer to the front wall (easier for the rear-ported Almarro and the front-ported JBL than the infinite baffle Dayton), but the room is well energized and the large and open soundstage is good compensation. But if your room is smaller (but not too small; otherwise you might as well go desktop), that helps.

• Loudspeakers Used Some of my smaller loudspeakers, like the LS3/5A's and Sonus faber Electa Amator are not good candidates. I round up the usual suspects. Almarro M1A The Almarro M1A is one of my favorite bookshelves (reviewed here). While I know the 89 db, 6 ohm loudspeaker works well with SET amps, I really wondered about one as low powered as the TU-8150. As we shall see, it was hardly a success. Dayton B652 This $30-35 loudspeaker is a wonder (reviewed here)! Although not for head-banging stuff, it does well with most acoustic music. Like the Almarro M1A, the B652 is also a 6 ohm loudspeaker. Its sensitivity is spec'ed at 87 db, lower than the Almarro, but it seemed to play louder and with more ease than the Almarro. I attribute this to its first-order crossover design, which usually are easy to drive (witness Loth-X, Reference 3A and B&W CM1, to name a few). Not at all a bad job, but... JBL L20T I dragged this pair out last, not expecting that much. It is a wonderful loudspeaker (reviewed here), but from my experience, large and classic JBL's usually prove to be much less SE amp friendly than Tannoy's of equal sensitivity rating, not to mention Altec and Klipsch. But this is the smallest model, which has about the same volume as Almarro, but much larger than the diminutive Dayton. It is rated at 87 db, same as the Dayton. Notably, the impedance rating is higher than both Almarro and Dayton, at 8 ohm. This may be of some import, as we shall see later.

• Op Amp In Parts I and II, with my 104 db horns, I preferred to bypass the Op Amp (removing it). And so I started this way. But with these smaller loudspeakers, even using the louder Input 1 the preamp volume had to be cranked all the way up. Even then the sound was not too dynamic. Obviously, for more inefficient loudspeakers, the Op Amp is necessary.

• Input I vs Input 2 I started with the less loud Input 2 (RCA). Both the Almarro M1A and Dayton B652 played pretty well, but it was clear the Dayton was louder and more lively. On orchestral music, the M1A's texture seemed a little thick in comparison, which I took to be an indication of not enough power. I then switched to Input 1 (with 3.5mm to RCA adaptor) and surely the sound immediately perked up, especially for the M1A. However, as the Op Amp is in use now, the preamp volume knob had to be carefully controlled as otherwise overloading can be heard (in the case of M1A). Even with no overloading, it was clear that, compared to Input 2, though more incisive, the sound lacked body (lean midbass and bass). What I am not sure about is if this is just a question of loading, or if the (low) quality of the 3.5mm adaptor has something to do with it. I thought to DIY an adaptor but that would have to wait.

• Ultralinear Previously, in Part II, using my horns, I preferred Pentode Mode to Ultralinear, and so with these smaller loudspeakers I started with Pentode. But the more I listened, even with careful attention to overloading, I found the distortion to be bothersome at high level. At first I thought that was due to clipping or overload. Remembering that Ultralinear reduces distortion, I switched back to Ultralinear and was amazed at the much cleaner sound.

• JBL L20T After I thoroughly tested the Almarro M1A and Dayton B652, I was a bit frustrated to be honest, particularly by the M1A. And so I hauled out the heavy vintage JBL pair with a heavy heart, so to speak. As soon as the music started I almost jumped out of my seat. GREAT stuff and a dream match that only happens once in a while! Everything became more three dimensional, more vital, and that tone! A revelation, Amen. Even using Input 2 the sound now had dynamics and scale that sounded like much larger loudspeakers. I had been listening repeatedly to Bernstein's exemplary late DG recordings of Copland's Appalachian Spring (LAPO) and Brahms 4th (VPO). All the loveliness and lyricism of the scores were brought out like nothing before, yet the proceedings felt tight and inexorable, which these scores also need. The volume was cranked pretty high up, but even with the Op Amp in place there was no undue "sandy" texture - mass strings had body and sheen. Only when the volume got really loud did a little bit of steeliness creep in, but that is expected as the distortion rises, and even pure tube amps would do the same. When I start discussing the music, you can tell I am beginning to really enjoy the music rather than just dutifully digging out facts for this article. Some albums I just had to play more than once. Kulanjan, the great collaboration between Taj Mahal and Toumani Diabate (Hannibal/Rykodisc) was simply stunning. The contrasting timbers of the guitar and the African Kora and the modulations of the 2 male and 1 female voices were effortlessly, and mellifluous. I know this album well, but as rendered by this humble pairing of Elekit and JBL, it is the best I have ever heard it. Rhythmically it has more swing than even on my horns! And in Kancheli's Lament, every whisper of the violin (really low in volume) as well as volcanic orchestral outbursts were highly atmospheric. This combination gets to the meaning of all kinds of music! Phono Playback So far with the small loudspeakers I have tested only with CD. The extra gain required for Phono proved taxing for the M1A and even the B652. But it is a different story for the L20T. Through the Aurorasound Vida the sound was irreproachable, lively and detailed. On Neumann's Leipzig Gewandhaus Ma Vlast (a late 60's East German recording, first issued in the US on London LP, so many later reincarnations, including CD, were mostly of German origin), the tonal splendor of the Leipzigers and the majesty of the reading were utterly compelling. A great but little known recording, extremely well recorded to boot (as is usual for East German era stuff). Similarly, Haitink's first Mahler 9th (Philips) displayed a cavernous soundstage in which the famously warm Concertgebouw woodwinds played echt characterfully, and the burnished brass tone! And William Tell, in that greatest of all Rossini Overture recordings, Piero Gamba/LSO (my LP is a cheap latter-day Holland London pressing), had an adrenaline-infused and BIG sounding Alpine storm (which much predates Strauss' essay, and I heard a chirping woodwind figure that likely was quoted by Strauss). Wow!

• Direct In I wanted to see how the preamp fared without a preamp. I used System III's Theta Data Transport and connected it to my Micromega MyDac with a Belden 1694A, fed it into Input 2 and adjusted the volume using the TU-8150's volume knob. Wow! I must say I was wooed yet once again by the Micromega! The fantastic rhythmic expression was evident with Kulanjan. One day I'd like to match it up with my Sparkler (which I have brought with me to NYC). The sound was really lovely, and when I switched back to the Shindo it was evident the texture was thickened by tube. Some may prefer the greater incisiveness of Direct In, but when running multiple sources (phono) and playing large orchestral works the addition of a preamp adds needed weight and punch, considerable advantages for classical listeners like me. 

Comments

• Elekit TU-8150 in General Though all designed to a price point, all current Elekit products have a reasonably muscular sound and driving power. However, the TU-8150, being the lowest in power, does require the potential user to have a clear goal in mind. 6V6 The cheap and ubiquitous, yet legendary 6V6 tube again reveals its glory. What a sound! There is not much point to run it as a triode (halving its already meager power), since it sounds so good in Pentode (with horns) and Ultralinear (with smaller loudspeakers). Warm Up With the Op Amp in situ, around half an hour of warm up is needed for it to sound its best.

• Elekit TU-8150 for Desktop/Headphone Although I don't have a desktop at the moment, I have quite a bit of experience, and actually think this amp is well nigh perfect for desktop/headphone, and I am sure it was designed with such users in mind. Although low in power, Its superbly detailed and rhythmically sophisticated sound, allied to excellent headphone output, is ideal for the task. Dayton B652 The Dayton illustrates this. It may not be able to energize a room like the much larger JBL L20T can, but it never puts a foot wrong. If I were to build a serious desktop, I'd add a subwoofer (there are good choices even around $100) to flesh up the sound.

• Elekit TU-8150 for In-Room Small Loudspeakers As my experience shows, it may take some time and patience to come up with a suitable partner. Given the very close sensitivity figures of the 3 loudspeakers in question, I can only surmise that the success of the L20T is partly due to its more tube-friendly (higher) impedance (and in the link to my previous article on L20T provided above we know for sure its impedance curve is utterly benign). Based on my experience I'd say it is better in general to have loudspeakers over 90 db's in sensitivity. News Incidentally, recently both Stereophile and TAS recommended in their April issues an affordable high-sensitivity loudspeaker that those interested may want to look into (since you are reading this article, you are probably one). The former reviewed the $549, 96 db, nominal 8 ohm Klipsch RP-600M (not online yet, but read the review in sister website cnet); the latter the $900, 91 db (but 6 ohm) Tower JBL Stage A190 (here). Being a fan of both Klipsch and JBL, I'd love to hear them (unlikely). By my estimate, the Klipsch will surely work a treat (due to its super-efficiency and higher rated impedance), whereas the JBL will likely too. The good thing is, the TU-8150 is so small and light that you can take it to audition loudspeakers!

• JBL L20T This is a gem that surprises by its performance with 2.9 watts. It confounds me because my 5 db more sensitive, but much larger JBL 4312 (12" woofer) does not work that well with 300B (~8 watts). But, good news to me! I am not sure what I like most: the effortlessness, the sweet and articulate midrange, the warm mid-bass/bass, the intimation of a larger scale than the physical size would indicate. All of it! A thought on matching: in the L20T Part II (link above) what I wrote of my impression of L20T vs Almarro M1A when driven by T-Amp was not at all similar to this round. So, you have been warned that synergy is involved and extrapolation, like much reasoning and measurement in hifi, may not always hold court.

• Micromega MyDAC I have never previously heard my Micromega in my US systems. Suffice to say, this brief outing really tickled me! I prefer its sound to the flagship Sony SACD player - more rhythmic engagement and flow. As a matter of fact, just before this is written I briefly moved it to System II and did a direct comparison and my impression remains the same. Perhaps I shall write an article on this and Sparkler in the future. A killer budget DAC, no, a killer DAC, period.

Postscript: This article is long in the making. I am glad I was more than repaid for my efforts. The next installment may take a while. I have to get back my Elekit TU-8500 preamp, match it with the Elekit  for a listen and then roll its OPA2227 into the TU-8150. Salut!