hello, i believe i have the sc interconnects (black,nickel carbon shield and no arrows).
what is the difference in the two interconnects and what is the upgrade fee?
thanks,
marvin
Quote from: mboldda1 on March 27, 2009, 10:19:09 PM
hello, i believe i have the sc interconnects (black,nickel carbon shield and no arrows).
what is the difference in the two interconnects and what is the upgrade fee?
thanks,
marvin
I do not know if many people have yet made the switch from the SC version to the SC Dot version of the Grover's. Grover claims they are better and we know he has a very good ear. Upgrade prices are $50.00 for a 1 meter pair and $75.00 for a 2 meter pair.
Ken
mboldda1
I have had the Grover "SC" with no "direction arrow" since February 10th
(burned-in similarly as described below)
and used those for source to preamp and preamp to amp of 2-channel system,
until I received Grover "SC." (SC dot) interconnects on March 21st.
I put the SC dot ICs in the 2-channel interconnect spots
and moved the Grover "SC" with no "direction arrow" to the source to preamp position for the center and surround channels of multi-channel system. All other ICs in multi-channel system are Grover "SC" with the direction arrow.
I burned in the new Grover "SC." (SC dot) interconnects using Track 2 of the IsoTek Enhancer CD
running on repeat overnight during sleeping hours for more than a week and they sound well stabilized at this point.
I previously posted in AudioNervosa Album Review section re the improvement
in listening to the Japanese remaster of Van Morrison's "Astral Weeks."
Today over lunch I fired up my Modwright SWL9.0 Signature tubed linestage (w/cryoed 1957 metal base Philips Miniwatt 5AR4/GZ34 and 2 Bendix 6900s) and after it warmed up for 30 minutes or so,
I listened to the track "Stormy Monday" on the DSD SACD "Allman Brothers Band at Fillmore East"
in SACD stereo (I am using Grover's latest configuration speaker bi-wire speaker cables also received February 10th). Superb blues from Duane and Greg Allman, Dicky Betts, Berry Oakley, Butch Trucks and Jaimoe.
The Grover "SC." (SC dot) carries the soul/emotion of the music even better than the already excellent Grover "SC with no direction arrow" - just draws me more into the music.
I couldn't resist playing "Stormy Monday" again in SACD surround sound after a few minutes...
Can't wait to get the more Grover "SC." ICs I have ordered (Grover e-mailed he is already working on them),to use in all positions in my multi-channel system - as the music will only get even better :drool:
Mhnn...another improvement to the ICs. The older SC's has been my staple IC since the last "upgrade". I still got two of the even older S...one of which I hardly ever use.
Maybe I will upgrade the old S to the now SC. .And next time around upgrade the SC to the .1 or whatever.
Kinda reminds me of a car lease, after a couple years return it for the newer model for a small fee.
Just got my upgraded pair of SC. interconnects back and for those sitting on the fence as someone once said, " GET ER DONE"
There are no directional arrows on mine but I do use them in the direction of the writting on the cable.
I'll have to ask Grover about this.
I will be doing a review on the SC. interconnects and speaker cables for Stereo Mojo in the future.
Marvin
That's cool Marvin!!
Got mine today :)
Mind if I bitch? These have to be the tightest fitting connectors in audio history. Is this really necessary? I'm not sure I can ever get them off again without doing some serious mayhem. Ok well they are on the Isotek disk for a while so no impressions. Anyone have a cleare idea now about directionality or is this left up to guess-work? I put them going the same way, whatever that means (letters closer to amp). Fact service, pretty cables, bad-ass connectors. As soon as there is an update about the misbehaving speaker cables, let's hear about it.
shep, once you take them off and then put them back on a couple of times they loosen up. here is what grover had to say when i asked him about the missing arrows.
"The early models of the SC IC's used an active carbon nickel shield so that's why the directionality. The superior passive carbon nickel shield of these new models is not directional. I do believe that the signal should be applied the same way each time, that's why the label is on one side of the cable. I run my cables the same as you."
Quote from: mboldda1 on April 20, 2009, 06:39:44 AM
shep, once you take them off and then put them back on a couple of times they loosen up. here is what grover had to say when i asked him about the missing arrows.
"The early models of the SC IC's used an active carbon nickel shield so that's why the directionality. The superior passive carbon nickel shield of these new models is not directional. I do believe that the signal should be applied the same way each time, that's why the label is on one side of the cable. I run my cables the same as you."
Usually what makes the wire directional is the grounding scheme. Wire is NOT directional. Now when its burned in then its directional. Do you mean the shield was connected to ground or it had a power source such as a battery ? One can either connect the shield to the input end, float at both ends, float at both ends and provide a drain wire to attach to ground or use an actice shield with a battery. So which application are we talking about here ?
The use of the carbon shielding has been one of the biggest improvements to cables IMO. As an experiment I slipped some over a homemade cord for kicks. Floated at both ends. Very affective in lowering the noise floor. May be subjective as I cannot measure any results of change. Had to rely on my ears which again is subjective.
Your new cables should be much improved using the new shielding material. A VG upgrade and reasonably priced. ENJOY!.
charles
Conductors are not directional when they signal AC, but wires that ate a pig are usually directional.
I think stereofool has a funny story about directional speaker wires?
[attachment deleted by admin based on 2 year limit]
Alright then, no directionality, just burn them in one way and keep using that direction. As for the plugs...
IF I can get them off without tearing the back off my MArantz cdp...actually had I some of that super silver based paste or something similar, they might not be quite so tight. I do not :duh want to start a flaming row here but it isn't exactly true that wire has no preferred direction. Depending on how it has been drawn, the internal christaline structure will have a potential for a preferred direction of electron flow. (depending on the boundry effect) burning them in or as in the case of Furteck, sending massive jolts of current thru them, will create an easier flow one way from another. I'm sort of making this up from bits and pieces I've gleaned here and there. Leave me with my illusions and pseudo science, It's more fun that way. One day we believers wil be vindicated! :duh
First impressions after a 10hr Isoteck burn: favorable. Of course it is still "green", meaning tight, rather raw and way too crispy but that is expected. However there is a good sense of spaciousness and air and maybe a slight improvement over the previous versions at both ends of the spectrum. Very much a "house" sound, nothing startling except that it is listenable at this early stage, which wasn't true of the earlier cables.
More to follow. For those of you not familiar with my rather odd audio qualifications, my system is very basic and consists of an ancient and very tricked-out Marantz cdp (which could now be graced with the NOS term), a custom built ICE-based amp, incorportating a Vishay ladder-type passive front-end and a pair of Dutch TL's, strung with solid core OCCC wire. Let's say for want of superlatives that the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts and plays way above it's price class.
i know the older inteconnects did not have an active power source such as ac or battery, i assume grover means by active is the sheild being connected. someone will have to get grover to explain this.
Thanks for the info re: connector tightness and other comments. Re: Connector tightness - I personally prefer a good degree of tightness for my ICs; however, it's interesting that the newest iteration of Grover ICs might be initially supertight, as mentioned by one poster, and then subsequently loosen up.
I note that a set AV connectors that I'm using with my AV setup definitely lack tightness and are a PITA if I move things around (like I just had to do when I got my fireplace rebuilt in the past 30 days). FYI, I use that SST paste, too.
Seeing the speaker cable Group Buy is in limbo for the nonce, perhaps the upgrade price if $50.00 for a 1 meter pair of ICs will merit consideration. Again, thanks for the input.
The connector tension on all my Grover ICs is about the same, on the SC. too. But there's always chance of extra tight tolerance. I think Grover uses a Switchcraft high copper alloy RCA male, plated in silver to his own specification. On the whiteys he tweaked that connector a lot as part of the development of the graphite, iirc.
I had a good long listen last night (couldn't help myself!) I am impressed. This is not just an incremental step but quite a major change. Please remember that unlike most of you, I have no opportunity to mix and match, and no changes in my system except these cables (and the previous x-over tweak), so I know the sound. In spite of it not being run in, it was obvious something special has been done. This up-grade is a must for those who are hesitating and for those who are considering buying for the first time, re-morgage your morgage :shock:
and just do it. I'm coming from someone who has never had super expensive interconnects (of the 500+$ class) so you may find me being naive. Non the less, this is a delightful surprise. The improvements are across the board, immediately audible and perfectly describable. Thanks Grover and thanks AN.
I agree... In the under 500 range, Grover's 'sc.' IC's are a serious contender and made and immediate and remarkable improvement over the last iteration at our last G2G. It's rare that 5 people unanimously hear not just a change but an improvement.
Glad the results were as good for you as they were for us, Shep. :)
this is what i had to say to grover after i got my sc. interconnects back.
hello Grover, received the cables yesterday and all i can say is...
you didn't have to send the other pair yet, i am scared to put them in in place of my reference windigo interconnects. i have been using your cables between the preamp and power amp with the windigo on the source.
the windigo (from 6sonsaudio in Canada) retail for $950 (i paid $550) here's some info on them:
Windigo RCA interconnects:
Four strands of our very best 24 ga silver/gold/copper alloy wire to positive pole
Four strands of 22 ga silver/gold/copper alloy wire to the return;
Each strand fed into it's own Teflon for best dielectrics;
Shielded jacket for best RF/EMI protection;
Terminated with WBT silver 0110 ag RCA's or WBT 0108 RCA's (your choice);
Treated with Furutech nano liquid for superior contact.
www.6sonsaudio.ca
with just the one pair in i realize the old sc's were holding my system back, better tunefull bass, quieter background, more upper midrange detail, better tonality, more air around individual instruments, no harshness in the highs, better dynamics. you have hit a home run.
Who ever said "ear sex" was absolutely brilliant. That describes in a nutshell what this obsession has been all about (all 40 years of it). To ne honest, I haven't had a good aural orgasm since the 80's and the hey-day of vinyl (when I had the cash to splurge), but I'm still trying. Back to Grover's cables. With all do respect to Grover's efforts, no one is going to pretend these are going to take away the blue ribbon from the uber-expensive ones, but they share a very similar trademark: musicality. For the life of me I don't understand why it's necissary to spend thousands of dollars of great connections. Well yes I do appreciate some of the very expensive and esoteric research into things like liquid mediums and exotic metals and the like, but maybe it should be possible to get much closer for much less and maybe Grover is the man. I really don't want to hear "Great" cables because that's just going to make me crazy with audio lust that I can't afford. I am puzzled how, despite all the efforts and expense lavished on this, even the most expensive cables can sound radically different. I guess we don't yet know what we are hearing or expecting to hear or where the limits are (there seem yet to be none). Theoritcally the perfect conducter should exist but I guess have the fun is in the search. Sorry for this aside. Now I have to sit thru endless hours of idiot sounds (Isotek) until I get to hear what Grover has really wrought.
Just some words: more sensuous, tactile, silky, meaty, articulate. Better soundstaging due I think to more emphasis on decay rather than leading edge. More engaging and musical, less mechanical (due to a great sense of harmonics and spacial clues.) 30 hours of Isotek mindlessness with occasional forays into music to releave the tedium. Surely I'm not the only one to have more precise description than just "better"!?
Guys I take exception to concept that there are great cables because they cost so horribly much. Really price is irrelevant in the cable business. Copper is $2 a pound how much copper do you think is in the really expensive cables. Even if the cable's pure silver, silver is $13 a troy ounce. I'd like to know the $500 cable that out performs mine? I've compared my cables to cables costing $1000's some of them were not even good let alone excellent. It's easy to really be mislead in this hobby, the cost of a product in this field doesn't necessarily indicate it's performance. My desire in this wonderful recreation is to provide extraordinary cables for everyone, not just the capital rich guys. I've always admired Dynaco and use them as my marketing standard. They were called the poor mans Marantz and they were. They sold more amps and preamps than any other by far, and their stuff is excellent to this day (with a bit of modern upgrades). Their transformers are amazing, my first preamp and amp was a Dynaco Pas 3x, and Stereo 70 that I built in 1967. I still have it, and I consider it a wonderful performer to this day. My point is; really expensive prices in this field rarely translates to excellence, and to make assumption's based on price is erroneous. IMHO
Grover: I think I can speak for us all in wishing you to become the Henry Ford of the Audio world, or more specificaly, to turn water into wine and pig's ears into silk purses! Your latest IC proves your point, up to a point, and none of us want to spend thousands on pseudo science and hype and fancy packaging. However the fact remains that some of those super cables do in fact sound just that...super (ear sex!). There's no getting around that reality and those here who have had the opportunity to carefully listen to various ones are not making up their conclusions based on wishful thinking but have both the ears and the equiptment to make a sober, solid judgement. We are rooting for you and support you as best we can, but having thrown down the gauntlet, so to speak, it is up to you to prove your argument by providing cables that can play in that league and do so at a price point that emphatically demonstrates that a 500 $ loudspeaker cable can hold its own against a 5000$ one. Personally I am dying for you to succeed since I will never be able to afford the latter.
Shep my friend, that's my goal. To me the object of all this, is to reproduce the actual recorded event as real as possible. To be there, the cables, and equipment becoming a time machine. Not sure how "super (ear sex) figures here. I gladly pick up this gauntlet. It's funny to me that keeping prices low disqualifies one from the super ear sex category what ever that category might be. I'm not a believer in the higher the price the better the product illusion. I feel that in many ways this illusion has damaged this wonderful hobby. I for one am so grateful for the internet, it free's us of pretenders, helps us get to the real stuff. Makes it possible for someone like me to develop and market a product that people can enjoy and afford. Before the internet cables like mine could not be available. Things are changing for the best, there is now more innovation from dedicated consumed individuals, than ever before.
Grover,
I certainly second the wishes for great success, on your part, not only for you to achieve your ideal of closer to 'real' cables, but also financial success based upon bringing a realistically priced product to market that the actual masses can afford, and enjoy.
Also, thank you for your willingness to 'work' with us (group buys, cable loans, etc.) so that we all may further enjoy what (I think) got us into this wonderful hobby...and that is our universal love of music.
Nice to know you are lurking/listening Grover:D :lol Ok so let's forget the price of silver and copper and gold and exstatium for the moment; that's pretty irrelevant. Anyone can buy tubes of fine oil paint but few can turn that into a Van Gogh. So what's so special about the the high-priced cables (the one's that sound as good as they cost)and how to reproduce that magic/artistry/science for a price mortels can afford? Anyone else want to chime in please? Don't leave me holding the bag :shock:
Quote from: shep on April 23, 2009, 09:32:36 AM
Nice to know you are lurking/listening Grover:D :lol Ok so let's forget the price of silver and copper and gold and exstatium for the moment; that's pretty irrelevant. Anyone can buy tubes of fine oil paint but few can turn that into a Van Gogh. So what's so special about the the high-priced cables (the one's that sound as good as they cost)and how to reproduce that magic/artistry/science for a price mortels can afford? Anyone else want to chime in please? Don't leave me holding the bag :shock:
Interesting. While walking before work this morning, the painting / artist analogy came to mind. I'm sure there are others -cooking / homebrewing / etc. Looking forward to more discussion.
DISCLAIMER: I own Grover ICs and am very pleased with them.
Quote from: grover on April 23, 2009, 09:12:24 AM
It's funny to me that keeping prices low disqualifies one from the super ear sex category what ever that category might be.
Your cables were not judged on price. The Straleys beat the Grover SCs for half the price.
Quote from: grover on April 22, 2009, 04:01:29 PM
Guys I take exception to concept that there are great cables because they cost so horribly much.
They are not great because they cost so much, they cost so much because they are great. It's all about value.
Bash the capital rich guys all you want, but just hope they don't stop spending. Only people with significant disposable income buy high end audio gear.
Quote from: richidoo on April 23, 2009, 11:07:04 PM
Quote from: grover on April 23, 2009, 09:12:24 AM
It's funny to me that keeping prices low disqualifies one from the super ear sex category what ever that category might be.
Your cables were not judged on price. The Straleys beat the Grover SCs for half the price.
Quote from: grover on April 22, 2009, 04:01:29 PM
Guys I take exception to concept that there are great cables because they cost so horribly much.
They are not great because they cost so much, they cost so much because they are great. It's all about value.
Bash the capital rich guys all you want, but just hope they don't stop spending. Only people with significant disposable income buy high end audio gear.
I attended the G2G and just want to say that I am in total agreement with Rich's comments. I believe that most of us that attended the meeting did so with a real interest in hearing how the Grover Cables performed versus our currently used cables. Rich uses JPS Superconductor 3's, Carl uses Straley's, Mike uses a long run of JPS SCs that are less expensive than the Superconductor 3's and I use HT Pro 9's. All of these cables were compared head to head with the Grover's. There was no bias other than a hope that the Grover's would deliver performance better than the cables we showed-up with. Unfortunately this was not the result and I certainly hope the Grovers that are evaluated at Rich's in May really strut their stuff!
Ken
Its refreshing to see a cable Manf. with common sense and a fair priced product. There are many ways to skin a cat as we have seen with all the different cable manfs. There is NO best cable IMO, just different as the system they are implemented into will determine their sound. SYNERGY baby. Your cables are worth a try as I believe in your sincerity to produce a quality product. Best of luck.
charles
Can we please NOT confuse the IC's with the speaker cables since the latter may have had something wrong with their construction. The IC's are a steal at the price. Lest Grover think we are being spiteful or begrudging, I believe we all want him not only to succeed business-wise, but to prove that great cables don't have to cost a fortune.
Shep, great point! The GTG at my place was primarily intended to compare speaker cables and that we did as reflected in earlier posts here and in other threads. However, this thread, which was started as a discussion of Grover's new ICs, has a few recent posts referencing Grover's speaker cable comparison which could be misinterpreted.
We did have the chance to compare Grover's latest 'SC.' interconnects with his 'SC' ICs as well. There was no doubt at the GTG or as posted by others, that not only are Grover ICs excellent cables at a great price point, but also that the new SC. cables are a definite step up from the SC, which were already outstanding ICs.
Bash the capital rich guys all you want, but just hope they don't stop spending. Only people with significant disposable income buy high end audio gear.
[/quote]
Are you saying Rich that only the rich guys should have great cables. Also are you saying that in the event my cables should achieve great status I should raise my prices astronomically. Because they've become high art? By the way I'm not bashing rich guys why would I do that? I'm with you I glad that there are rich guys providing to this fun. I have a different way of looking at it. I want the other than rich guys to have great cables too. This is good for everyone, and is my focus. I'm looking forward to your meet Rich. I'll break in the cables this time.
Quote from: grover on April 24, 2009, 10:42:38 AM
I want the other than rich guys to have great cables too. This is good for everyone, and is my focus.
It hurts to want. High end audio is not a fertile environment for charity. Consumers expect to get what they pay for. I am sure your prices will continue to increase rapidly as they did this year to keep up with improving value and increasing demand. You can't bend the laws of business anymore than those of physics.
Marketing on price alone has been a losing tactic since commerce began. It cheapens a company's image and creates mistrust because it is immoral to deliberately make an inferior product, or to not love money, the only two ways to have artificially low prices. People don't trust people who don't love money enough to raise prises to the market tolerance. They trust people who raise product quality to compete on value. That's why companies who market themselves as "the best" in their industry are the most successful. Being the best is the ultimate value statement. That's why we compare you to JPS Aluminata, which is our best for the time being. We are very fortunate to have it available (http://www.hometheaterdoc.com/) as a reference.
Rich don't discourage the man! We need idealists!
Ever read 'Rich Dad, Poor Dad' (http://www.amazon.com/Rich-Dad-Poor-Money-That-Middle/dp/0762434279/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240601967&sr=8-1)? Might be worth the $5.
It hurts to want. High end audio is not a fertile environment for charity. Consumers expect to get what they pay for. I am sure your prices will continue to increase rapidly as they did this year to keep up with improving value and increasing demand. You can't bend the laws of business anymore than those of physics.
Marketing on price alone has been a losing tactic since commerce began. It cheapens a company's image and creates mistrust because it is immoral to deliberately make an inferior product, or to not love money, the only two ways to have artificially low prices. People don't trust people who don't love money enough to raise prises to the market tolerance. They trust people who raise product quality to compete on value. That's why companies who market themselves as "the best" in their industry are the most successful. Being the best is the ultimate value statement. That's why we compare you to JPS Aluminata, which is our best for the time being. We are very fortunate to have it available (http://www.hometheaterdoc.com/) as a reference.
[/quote]
Rich I think a lot of what you're saying is your opinion, and a lot common sense. I have nothing against any company selling their products for what ever they feel it's worth. Obviously the cream rises to the top. Again I'm not sure that it's a general rule that companies that label themselves the best are the most successful. In the real world there are many examples of companies that offer quality products that do not label themselves the best and out sell those companies labeling themselves the best. Don't you suspect that labeling ones product the best maybe a marketing ploy. Dynaco a company I previously mentioned that never labeled itself the best outsold all the other amplifier manufacturers together. Therefore as I see it success is related to the quality of the product and it's affordability. Also I think the general rule in high end audio is that it's very relative what you get for your money. I glad you're a believer though. My marketing plan has nothing to do with charity, more with making wonderful products more affordable. Wouldn't you like this also?
My main point about being disqualified is still unanswered, and instead we are off on a tangent about business philosophy. Your prices are good and the cables are a good value, you raise them 33% since last GB and the value has increased. You want to serve poor audiophiles which is commendable, but you can't run a business on that while still competing with the best performing brands with no such self-imposed price limitation. You will always need capital rich guys to make your business viable. As long as both companies price fairly by delivering value matching the price, the rich will choose the higher priced cable to get more performance into their system. There is no way to deliver the same performance at 20% of the price in the long run. If there is then the price no object cable makers will lower prices to offer more value and attract more customers. They don't need to because they offer good value at the high price. That's what the G2G showed, and we are not capital rich guys. None of us paid full price for our wires and only half own JPS.
I may seem like I'm being a jerk but my original point about the complaining that we weren't fair in evaluating the speaker wires is still ignored. After all the work we have done for grover that is tough to swallow. I tried to use logic to convey the point that his reason that we cheated him is price was a farce but it is hitting a forcefield of obfuscation. This is my last post on the matter. Sorry to everyone for the diversion.
I'm FAR from an intellectual...so I won't even try to hurt my brain by going anywhere near the debate :rofl:!
However, I would LOVE to have very high performing cables for (relative) cheap. I think that if Grover can pull this off, then he will certainly be supplying a wonderful service to audiophiles of all stripes.
Keep in mind that our generation of audiophiles are starting to get on in age...except for some of you pups :roll:. Thus, the only way our hobby can (probably) survive, let alone grow, will be for the price of entry to be within reach of those with more modest means. Certainly, this applies to the next few years as our economy slowly recovers; and keep in mind that it may be a significant number of years before we see the amount of freely disposable income become available to allow people to spend large bucks on the 'toys' that we love so much.
Sorry I must have missed the you weren't fair in comparing the speaker wires. I never said that, and don't believe it. I raised the price of IC's because the carbon was expensive, but have no plans in the for seeable future to do so again. And I plan to be true to my philosophy. To me this is all fun, and I find this marketing debate stimulating. I'm glad we had it. There was very good information shared. I learned a lot thanks to all.
Me too, thanks Grover! You're a good sport.
Radio silence? Is the subject of the speaker wires taboo? HAs anyone now heard them properly? I would like an update please. By the way, it seems that the IC's take a Looooong time to burn in. I must be around 70 hours on the burn in CD and they are still arranging their molucules.
Hi shep! The speaker wires are back with Grover, he is checking them out. If he finds something out of order then we'll listen to them again on May 30th after they're fixed.
Don't you just love it when occasionally it all comes together? I have had the cables burning in on the Isotek cd for well over 150 hours. Tonight I put on my best test cd, (Steely Dan "Morph the Cat"...this is a must-have recording by the way and not bad musically either), turned it up LOUD and was rewarded with a wall of clean transparent sound, without a trace of hardness, thunderous bass, extended highs and everything working together like a charm. I don't know if it's the cables or the Jenzen caps finally settling in but I was a happy audio neurotic! I strongly recommend you reserve judgement on these latest Grover's until they have well and truly been thrashed to the last atom. The sound I have tonight it totally and utterly transformed from when I put them in the system. Voila By the way my ICE module amp is a winner. It just sits there, small, cool, and utterly composed no matter what it's asked to do. I had these stone walls pulsing and there wasn't a trace of clipping or strain.
Quote from: shep on May 02, 2009, 03:41:38 PM
Don't you just love it when occasionally it all comes together? I have had the cables burning in on the Isotek cd for well over 150 hours.... I don't know if it's the cables or the Jenzen caps finally settling in but I was a happy audio neurotic! I strongly recommend you reserve judgement on these latest Grover's until they have well and truly been thrashed to the last atom.
I too use the Isotek CD and it has
always appreciably shortened burn-in time. To those non-users: if it took Shep over 150 hours to burn the ICs with the Isotek CD, I think you may be looking at a disturbingly lengthy burn-in (1,000 hours?) process. Shep, I wonder if the caps had something to do with the length of time you experienced. Thanks for your post.
I agree isotek and frybaby work good to speed up break in. Grover is burning in the SC wires himself and listening to them before shipping back to us to make sure they are to his liking.
hmmmm. Life is a disturbingly lenghty burn-in. (Sunday philosopher) Well...I'm sure mine were NOT burned in before and yes you may well be right about the caps, although I can't remember anyone ever mentioning this about jenzen Caps. Black Gates and Mundorf yes. Please don't even think the words 1000 hours! That's just not possible. (he hopes) I would however like feedback about the experience of others and what changes they have percieved over time with Grovers cable.
Quote from: shep on May 03, 2009, 11:38:20 AM
hmmmm. Life is a disturbingly lenghty burn-in.
That is deep, Shep! But if you compare life with cables then at some point as cables age, they must also begin to decline. Hey, that's brilliant!!! It's not my body, ears and mind that are declining, it's my damn cables! :rofl:
I suspect Grover IC breakin is like with many cables. For me, they begin to relax and refine... the edge is replaced by a better sense of harmonic decay and definition. It's subtle if you're listening everyday but you do hit a point where you realize it just sounds damn nice. Well, that's been my experience. I've either got to get one of those cable burners or stop buying new cables.
Cables age more gracefully :(
Hey Shep,
Are your Grover IC.s sound still changing? How much time do you think you have on them by now?
I've only had mine for a couple of days, maybe 50hrs or so, is there much change beyond that?
Rob S.
Quote from: Rob S. on May 14, 2009, 08:53:00 AM
I've only had mine for a couple of days, maybe 50hrs or so, is there much change beyond that?
From my experience, I think you'll hear further improvement through 200 hours or more, but it's subtle.
I agree with the above. I must have 200+. There is an easing off, an opening, more texture and colour. They are NOT perfect (sorry Grover). On my system, which is admittedly a bit lean, there is a tendency to underline and project the midrange. I would have preferred something a tiny bit darker and richer. Then again I have certain reservations about my single-core speaker cables and I don't know how my ice amp would sound in another context, so don't take anything I say as gospel. If I were foolish enough, i would say these interconnects would go to the top of their price class and probably way beyond. I think they are good enough to reveal what is going into them and out. I don't think they would disgrace themselves in a hi-end rig. I wish we could finaly hear what the story is/was with the speaker cables. I have a serious itch that needs scratching. To answer you directly Rob, there are big changes from the 50 hour to the 200+. You wouldn't really hear that unless you literally walk away from the burn in and come back much later. The changes are gradual.