AZ Matrix II vs Harmonic Tech Magic Link2

For me... in my system... I'll take the Magic IIs over the AZs... any day.

That said, the HT Magic IIs ain't the end of the road either.

I've had both at one time or another in my rig (s). I use the HT M II as the main IC. it has decent bass, not the last word there, good tone, nice detail, and resonable resolution, while not bleaching out the color of the music.

I refer to the Magic II casually as the 'poor mans' MIT magnum. though they are quite different in some areas they are more alike than different... namely the color aspect.

Let me put it another way, I could easily go with the Magic IIs thoughout, but not the Magnums throughout, I don't think. They are too intensely revealing and reduce the vibrancy of the musical tones.

The HT Magic IIs are a better cable too than the older Is, yet both are worthwhile considerations as ICs. I found the IIs overall a better solution for me than the AZ cables for the IIs conveyed more of the venue ambience, and allowed for great detail without being strident or too 'hi fi-ish' sounding. Tjhey work well just about where ever. I loaned out my own set to a friend who has the older Is and together he felt his system got a significant shot in the arm and was well pleased with them, until he had to send them back to me. Like the Cardass neutral ref cables, I think everbody should have a set of each issued to them when they get serious about building a system as a baseline ref or last step. Depending on the means, of course.

Magic IIs work well also with tubes or SS. the price tag on the AZ & HT says it all IMHO.

I will be adding a Magic II to my system today b/w preamp and amp to go with a Kimber 1021 upstream. It will be replacing (possibly temporarily) a Kimber 1016 which is very nice, full-bodied with nice texture. I am hoping for a little more resolution while maintaining texture.

Interesting description Blindjim on the Harmonics - sounds like they will be interesting in my system. I own and have used many variants of MIT over the years. My only complaint is the higher marques just don't have the midrange texture the lower models like 330 SG have - but the 330 series doesn't have the resolution the higher marques have so it's a trade off like most cables are. The higher marques of MIT I am referring to are Magnum M1, 350 reference, and 350 SG EVO. I haven't tried the more recent iterations such as MA, dots, or Oracle except in speaker cables and found the same to be true, lack of midrange texture with my Thiels.

Good luck.

For me a MIT Mag would likely sit on my source outputs... as it has before. now there is a pair of Nirvana SX Ltds there. The imaging is better with the SX and the music is delivered uh, easier than it would have been with the Mags. The SX have better ambient retreval as well, but not the bass the MITs do.

The MIT Mags do image better than the Magic IIs by a noticeable bit. But again, the IIs are pretty good and especially for the $$$.

Thanks. Right out of the box it sounds very nice and seems to accomplish what I was after - beautiful detail retrieval while maintaining texture and timbre purity the system delivers with the help of the Kimber 1021's upstream. More time will tell...