Bradz: I'm not Jkuc, but i have compared cabling that is very similar in nature to Paul's Anti-Cables to AP Oval 9's. All i will say is that having the AP Oval 9's in one of my systems produced some of the worst listening that i've ever had to endure. Using a single driver full range speaker with no crossover parts between the amplifier and the speaker is extremely revealing and i did not like what i heard when i introduced the Oval 9's into the system at all. It was as if you were listening to a pocket transistor radio i.e. no bass and horribly tizzy treble response. Everyone that heard this system said it sounded horrible, but i kept playing it hoping that it would improve with time.
This was long before any of the glowing reviews came out on the AP cables, as i tried them when they were first released. 500+ hours of break-in wasn't enough. Maybe the AP's sound better after you get 1,000,000,000+ hours on them, i don't know. Obviously, i'd take the "Anti-Cables" over the AP's any day of the week : ) Sean
>
PS... I could never figure out why AP used one type of cable geometry for their silver cabling and a completely different geometry for their copper cabling. That is, if their computer simulations had shown one of these to be "the best" as their advertising states. If it truly were "the best", there would be no need for any other geometries to be used. In effect, their own products refute their marketing campaign aka "snake oil" and "cable hype".
