BEST TONEARM CABLE PURIST VENUSTUS GRAHAM IC 70

Nsgarsh,as a very good friend of EBM,and having almost the exact set-up as him,except speakers,I'll have the good fortune to compare the Venustas Phono link to the IC-70.This in about two weeks,as he HAS ordered the Venustas.I'm intimately familiar with his set-up,as I helped in setting it up,and have heard it dozens of times.I cannot wait for this,final comparison,for me,before really knowing any meaningful result.Should the Venustas "trump" the IC-70,then I will obviously move in that direction.BTW--it was your influence and input that put me up to recommending my friend move to a Venustas,since he was very curious about it possibly improving his already superb phono performance.He has a very "high res" system,that is Kharma based.

As an aside,I just called Bob Graham to ask for his input on this cable choice matter.His answer was very firm,in that he felt STRONGLY "there is no way the IC-70 can be improved",and "any other choices will only diffuse the sound,or add a different flavor".Obviously I hope he's correct,as this will save me some dough,but I will finally have my answer,soon!Thanks for being so generous with advice,but I DO hope you are wrong,on this one!

Speedy, my suggestion? Get out your checkbook!

For some time though, I wished I'd had a chance to hear the Silver Breeze before the Venustas (accidentally) came my way, fully broken in and about 2/3 off retail. Which I mention only because that's the only way I would have bought them sight unheard without an audition. As for the SB, I'll take John's word for it since he's apparently spent a lot of time comparing.

PS: Well what the hell did you expect Bob to say?

Neil, I wanted to make one clarification concerning the Aesthetix Io phono stage. The ARC PH2 and BAT VK-P10 are balanced phono stages from input to output. I had always read the Io's INPUT is not balanced; the input signal is ultimately converted to balanced on the input stage and then balanced from then on.

I used a DMM to confirm the above. The Io has XLR and RCA connectors on the input. With the RCA ICs into the Io, the DMM confirmed that the signal-return line is indeed grounded. It is easy to see this with the L & R returns measuring zero resistance relative to each other. The two phases could have been lifted from ground with the use of a separate ground line but the Io does not support this.

I then plugged in the SB's XLRs into the Io and the measurement indicated each minus phase was grounded. An easy confirmation on the XLR's pins of the Io's chassis showed this was indeed not due to the SB cable. So yes, the Io grounds the cartridge's return signal for each channel rather than floating the cartridge above ground which would result in the cartridge acting as a "balanced" or complimentary device.

I'm not sure why the Io was designed this way, but in the final analysis, I'm currently not running my cartridge in a truly balanced manner. There is no benefit to use a tonearm cable terminated with XLR cables into the Io. But perhaps with a unit like the BAT VK-P10 which also has XLR and RCA inputs, but with the XLRs being truly balanced, maybe the SB would outperform or be closer to the RCA terminated Venustas ICs.....just a thought.

The proof is in the pudding as the Io far exceeds the musical performance of the very good PH2 and VK-P10 that I had before; there is much more going on than processing the cartridge as a balanced device but I have to believe it would be beneficial.

John

John, that's interesting. Mark Levinson, in their highly acclaimed 32 and 320s phono stages does something similar. If you go to their website and open the pdf owner's manual for the optional phonostage cards, it talks about how/why they achieve a "balanced" input circuit for the cartridge, even though the inputs are RCA.

My guess is it's a way of achieving lower noise phono amplification, even if you have, for instance, dedicated tonearm cables that terminate with RCAs only.

Nsgarch,well we had the comparison yesterday.Yes the Venustas had a darker,more silken presentation.However the IC-70 had a more dynamic presentation,with fuller bass.All at first blush.

The arm was the Graham 2.2.What we did(three experienced audiophiles)was,first compare both cables with exact arm/cartridge parameters.Here,it was surprisingly close,with The Venustas being a bit smoother and refined,with a deeper stage.However the IC-70 had stronger bass and dynamics,with a wider stage.Yet two of us felt the Venustas was bringing out a bit more high freq detail,and smoother too.At this point a riot almost broke out,as my other pal(the most qualified of us all)was adamantly pushing for re-voicing to each cables strenghts.This was VERY time consuming.He won!

At this point,my friend Sid,a very experienced 'phile,asked if I would go through the process again(a pain in the butt,btw)but to see if the arm/cart parameters could be slightly re-voiced for each cables personality.This proved quite intriguing,as there was a definite arm/cart voicing for each cable(go figure).

The final result yielded a blacker background(I think)and enhanced depth,for the Venustas,with a slightly smoother high end and gorgeous high freq decay.The IC-70 still is more dynamic,in this particular set-up(my friend's),with a wider,almost explosive stage presentation.

Truthfully,I think there is a system dependant aspect to this,and am really at an impass,as to whether it was really all that big a deal.Even with the differences,which were clearly obvious,it was easy to voice the arm/cart parameters,slightly,to close the gap.This is my delemma,as I have gotten really good at this,yet don't like to rationalize,if something can be made better.

I have to really do some careful pondering,and maybe bring my own records to my friend's house,to quantify if it is worth spending the extra dough.Though I loved the Venustas,the IC-70 is NO slouch.Yet I cannot get away from the fact that I never heard such STUNNING high freq decay in my friend's system.

One final note(sorry for the length)--We had a 90 degree connector added to the arm side of the Venustas,to compensate for the required angle needed to properly connect into the Cosmos table(I have a Cosmos too).This turned out to be sourced from Cardas,and though superb,it almost required a pliers to seperate it from the arm.Also,due to the "pin" connections in the arm,the ninety degree(right angle) connectors did NOT allow the cabling to go straight down,as does the IC-70(which it should).I'm concerned that if I were to go Venustas,this could affect my table's suspension.Thought I would mention this.

Anyway,as this hobby is quite cerebral,I'm forced to think on all these matters,before making any changes.Also,I hate using my brain,too much!

Thanks for all your valuable thoughts,and any correspondence,on this matter,is always welcome.