Speltz Anti-cable needs break-in period?


I received a pair of Anti-cables a few days ago, and I have been using it for about 10 hours now.

It's obviously less bass, less soundstage, and a bit harsher sound while many ppl say anti-cables sound awesome right from the box.

What do you guys think?
I used transparent music link before.

I hope it gets better soon..
realprober
Sean,

If they used pigments in the fiberglass that are similar to those used in coatings (I suspect they would be very similar as the pigments are cheap commodities & would have the same function in fiberglass...color & hiding the substrate) then there may be some explanation as carbon-black is used in grey toned to black pigmenting. White pigment would typically be titanium dioxide...years ago it was "white lead" = lead oxide that is the root of the pre-mid seventies "lead paint" issue.
Actually the Anti-Cable website basically seems to suggest what Sean says: that twisting the runs may ameliorate top end roll-off by lowering total inductance. I was apparently misremembering when I implied that Speltz's site suggests twisting will do the same for bass response.

I tried researching further on the web, to locate whatever reference I was remembering about twisting, inductance and bass response, but couldn't find it again. I did, however, find seemingly contradictory claims surrounding this topic -- and that was looking mostly at independent technical writings and those posted on manufacturer's websites, not those of non-technical audiophiles (such as myself) in forums such as this. (There seems to be similar disagreement over the importance of characteristic impedance.)

So it's hard to know what to make of this. I guess the best thing to do is listen and compare, twisted vs. untwisted. The one time I tried separate-lead speaker cables, I twisted them together as recommended by that manufacturer (the cables sounded rolled-off in the treble and bass-heavy, so I didn't buy them, but I also didn't try them untwisted to compare). A lot of the online papers I read were written by technophiles whose larger agenda was often that fancy audiophile cabling is snakeoil and a ripoff, and who also claim inaudibility for different variables which I personally believe I have heard. Whereas of course the manufacturer sites are mainly trying to sell a product.

As the for the effect of dielectric pigment, given the arguments presented above, why should gray 'sound better' than black? Or red 'sound worse' than clear or white? In any case, it seems to me that the whole point of the dielectric in Anti-Cables is that it's as minimal as possible, in which case so should be the 'audibility' of its pigment.
I've had the anti-cables for 2 years now, just luv 'em. In all the threads i've participated re: paul's wonder wire, i've never ran across a person who preferred to twist them. Even Mr. Speltz sais to lay them so they aren't touching one another.

One thing many don't talk about is directionality...speltz's wire sounds deep & warm one direction and bright the other. I find the warmer directions and leave them to break in. My cables: anti-cables and 2 sets of anti-IC's w/eichmanns all took a month to break in.

No worries if you have these cables but haven't listened for direction...i had the anti-cables in place 12 months, then tried the direction thing & it was instantly noticeable...2 of the 4 runs were the wrong way - i swapped them and a week later the cables make amazing music.

I'm constantly looking for a new sp cable design i like under $500...besides the cheLa design from CV, my $50 anti-cables are it for me.

matt
i've never ran across a person who preferred to twist them. Even Mr. Speltz sais to lay them so they aren't touching one another.
How far apart do you have yours?
All things being equal ( ha ha ha ), enamel has a higher dielectric absorption ratio than Teflon. As such, even though there seems to be less dielectric influence in one's mind due to "seeing" less dielectric with enamel, the Teflon actually distorts the signal less. Sean
>