D_Edwards: I have several pieces of audio gear that are 20+ years old that still measure within spec and sound quite good. Age has little to do with actual performance so long as the unit has been used on a regular basis and hasn't been thoroughly abused and / or in a severe environment. Regular use not only keeps the caps energized, but problems related to thermal drift are also minimized. Simple rotation of the controls and flipping of the switches i.e. "normal use" also helps to keep oxidation and pitting from damaging said controls.
Other than that, my suggestion as to speaker cables were for the long term. That suggestion was also made in response to a specific question that someone had posted.
As a side note, just because someone is using "Brand X" gear today, that doesn't mean that they will be using that tomorrow or in two years. I know that the cables that i recommended can work quite well with these speakers and are capable of revealing what the electronics up-stream are capable of. Whether or not one likes what they hear with these cables in the system will depend on how pure & stable the signal is being fed into the speaker cabling and / or the end users own personal preferences.
As such, improving the signal fed into it these speaker cables will improve the performance of the system as a whole. I make mention of this as not all speaker cables are capable of revealing the differences in components, simply because the cables themselves introduce their own sonics and electrical loading characteristics into the equation. Should Mtrot ( or anyone else in this situation ) choose to upgrade their components, there would be no need to upgrade their cabling. After all, this cable has been shown to be linear to well beyond 100 KHz, offering minimal signal degradation within or anywhere near the audible passband.
Other than that, i agree that one should have "timbre matched" speakers at all points in a multi-channel system. I also think that one should have "timbre matched" amplification at all points in a multi-channel system. That's why i took the approach that i did with my multi-channel system. Sean
>
Other than that, my suggestion as to speaker cables were for the long term. That suggestion was also made in response to a specific question that someone had posted.
As a side note, just because someone is using "Brand X" gear today, that doesn't mean that they will be using that tomorrow or in two years. I know that the cables that i recommended can work quite well with these speakers and are capable of revealing what the electronics up-stream are capable of. Whether or not one likes what they hear with these cables in the system will depend on how pure & stable the signal is being fed into the speaker cabling and / or the end users own personal preferences.
As such, improving the signal fed into it these speaker cables will improve the performance of the system as a whole. I make mention of this as not all speaker cables are capable of revealing the differences in components, simply because the cables themselves introduce their own sonics and electrical loading characteristics into the equation. Should Mtrot ( or anyone else in this situation ) choose to upgrade their components, there would be no need to upgrade their cabling. After all, this cable has been shown to be linear to well beyond 100 KHz, offering minimal signal degradation within or anywhere near the audible passband.
Other than that, i agree that one should have "timbre matched" speakers at all points in a multi-channel system. I also think that one should have "timbre matched" amplification at all points in a multi-channel system. That's why i took the approach that i did with my multi-channel system. Sean
>