2. cables
  3. 119498-9095

Nordost Odin or Valhalla 2

Folks, 

Do you feel Nordost cables are worth it's asking price?  What's the proportionate amount one should spent on cables? 

After hearing them at RMAF 2015 and few other brands of cables, I decided to look into the upgrade cost.  I own a decent HT setup and invested over $125K in my pursuit of audio nirvana.  

So I contacted a Nordost dealer to get an estimate on my setup.  The dealer came back with an estimate of $110K on Valhalla 2.  Needless to say, I didn't even bothered to ask the cost of Odin in my setup.  

No offense to the dealers, but I started to wonder the profit markups on high end cables.  I do hear stories about some unscrupulous dealers who sell high end products to get spiffs from big manufacturers in shape of exotic vacations, free products and so forth if they sell more widgets.  Isn't this corporate hi-fi that only seeks to show returns for shareholders.  To me its pure business, where is the passion for audio?If they are only focusing on providing expensive audio jewelry and targeting individuals with deep pockets then I say, mission accomplished.  

I have much better experience with smaller companies who are dedicated and committed to providing 'magical' listening experience without taking a second mortgage on your home.  I thought the whole idea of audio art is to create aural magic.  

IMO most cables regardless of price point, will get you 80% of the performance of super expensive cables.   So is it really worth spending thousands of dollars more to achieve that 20% or 10% of performance? 

I would like to hear from folks who owns Odin or Valhalla 2 or other comparable brand of cables, what was decided factor in their choice, what other cables did you compare before settling with Odin or Valhalla 2.  

I don't have any hidden agenda or personal vendetta against high priced cables or dealers engaged in selling high end products.  The idea here is to gauge performance vs. cost of super expensive cables. 

Happy Listening!!!

128x128lalitk
bo1972's avatar
bo1972
2,789 posts
 
When Odin is used at shows, I always say: we will have about 1 metre of depth. In almost all situations this is the outcome.

1 metre of depth for highend is unacceptable. I don't understand why the people who give these demos are F. deaf!

I sold Nordost for over 9 years of time. I always said; it is incomplete, and these are facts.

They changed an importsant part to make the sound less harsh, but it still lacks properties you need and want.
bigamp
219 posts
 
bo1972, at the risk of extending what you have turned into an excruciatingly annoying thread, I believe you missed wlutke's point.  The OP asked about Valhalla Gen 2 versus Odin Gen 1.  You continue to make generalizations about all Nordost products (including Gen 2) based on your experience with Gen 1.  Can you characterize V2 as the OP asked?  If not, then your generalizations are merely counterproductive.
bo1972's avatar
bo1972
2,789 posts
 
They own the same properties, same level of depth.

You should ask why you would choose either?

I audtioned the presentation of Valhalla2, I any many others were not impressed.

I owned the Valhalla 1 for 12 years. But these days there are better and more complete cables.

Back then the Valhalla was able to create a better level in some areas compared to others. But now in 2016 we live in a different world.


wlutke
724 posts
 
bo1972 -

You said: "When Odin is used at shows, I always say: we will have about 1 metre of depth. In almost all situations this is the outcome."

Your bias against Nordost makes you look for and expect a bad result in the product while dismissing the good.  If your statement is not true in all situations, as you have stated, then the problem is not specific to the product but to its implementation.   I compared high end Audioquest to my mid-line Nordost and I heard what you are trying to express.  The Audioquest had smaller, more focussed images that gave the impression of a larger stage because of the small image size but with little difference in the actual placement in the listening room.  I liked both presentations.  The recording determined which presentation I preferred.  

bo1972's avatar
bo1972
2,789 posts
 
I have done thousands of test in audio and still do it a lot. It is all about finding patterns and the d.n.a. of a product.

I was succesful when I sold Nordost ( for over 9 years) and it made a combination with Kimber interconnects. This combination made the stage deeper and wider. And gave it a sharper individual focus of instruments and voices. And also a more involving mid frequency.

In blind test people prefered always this combination over a full Nordost combination.

It is very easy to explain why?

It is more complete and people prefer this over a less complete sound and image. Most people never did as many tests as I did. So their knowledge and insight is inferior. They are not even able to think about these options.

Audio is all about music. And music is all about emotion. That is why I create audio by Tru-Fi.

Tru-Fi is how music sounds in real. And consits  of 8 different parts you judge sound for. All these parts influences our emotion.

When you create a more complete and realistic sound and image like in real all people prefer it. It is that easy to explain and even during listening it is easy to understand why.

When you do not have a reference frame, you never will understand what you are doing to create your system. It will based on nothing.

Thie is why audio created by listening and hear what you like never will give a stunning and realistric sound.

Because when you do not understand why the stage and sound is what you are hearing. 

All systems at shows are in over 99% incomplete. Because the way people make a combination  does not make sense. It is ineffective and at the end you are so far away from the sound it could be and should be.

When a system has a higher level of emotion and realism, all people will prefer it. So this is why audio shoud be created like this.
More to discover