Comparing AQ Diamonds to the new AQ interconnects

Anyone compared the "old" line of SPEAKER cables to the new ones? I´m curious to know how my Argents (double run) stack up to the new AQ stuff (and other cables like Kimber, Tara, etc) Thanks,

Can any of you tell me what the Daimonds sound like before they break in? A friend got a demo pair from a dealer and brought them over here and I have no idea if they had any time on them. They didn't sound at all like I thought a cable of this design might sound like, I don't want to write them off out of hand, the bass was odd and very uncontrolled and the space was flattened, and the sound stage was puny. Is that the way they sound out of the box? It sounded like JBL L 100's! I know they gotta sound better than that.

I loved my AQ Diamonds and Lapis until I tried Mapleshade Clearview Double Helix for half the price. No comparison, in my system (CJ Premier l2s and l4). The AQ cables are mellow, the Mapleshades are music.

Dear Maxgain,

Hang in there with the Diamonds! Were your Diamonds inactive or disconnected for a while before you put them in your system? Cables often do not retain their burn in. If they are unused for some period of time (days?) or if their physical positioning (e.g., coiled vs uncoiled) changes, they need to be burned in again or at least left in place for a while. These are a function of the properties of their dielectric materials (see Audioquest's web site for some discussion). I think the Diamonds sound pretty good. Best Regards.

I have to wonder how much of a difference there is between some of these cables if they were all burned in using a burner for the same amount of time ? I think that a lot of the differences would be MUCH smaller than one might think. Sean
>