On the 12th Day of Christmas my true love gave to me...

Thanks:). They look very nice in black! I wonder if black is standard on later serial numbers. The one in Hilversum had #14 and #15. Did you have the chance to choose?

No, I did not (although maybe my dealer did and chose for me :)). My serial numbers are #19 and #20.
 
Congrats my friend - can't wait to hear 'em. Your S5's sounded amazing. If I remember correctly I asked you why did you not just stop here? ;^) Now I know!

Many times I sat there in awe listening to my S5's wondering how it could get better. The S5's are that good.
 
You need some Vieros speaker cables now for the Magicos! :) If you think they sound good now, you ain't heard anything.

Never heard of them. Giant killers or just a boutique Giant? I already gave up a car to get these speakers, not much $ for cables. In fact, I'm now using Mogami (not kidding).

Bring them in February! :)
 

Ahh, so you think just the speaker cables will make that much of a difference? None of the usual 'must use same brand throughout system' rules apply?

I'm currently using MIT Oracle SHD 90's. How would these compare sonically? For example, if Transparent are generous in the mid-bass/midrange region and MIT focuses on extension (with a rather lean mid-bass) where would the Viero's fall?
 
Ahh, so you think just the speaker cables will make that much of a difference? None of the usual 'must use same brand throughout system' rules apply?

I'm currently using MIT Oracle SHD 90's. How would these compare sonically? For example, if Transparent are generous in the mid-bass/midrange region and MIT focuses on extension (with a rather lean mid-bass) where would the Viero's fall?

Nevermind, Myles, I missed this line when I first read your review:

"Sonically, these cables share much in common with the top tier MIT cables—namely that neutrality, quietness, dynamics, low level resolution and with excellent recreation of the recording space—but with far more body, soul and musicality."
 
Nevermind, Myles, I missed this line when I first read your review:

"Sonically, these cables share much in common with the top tier MIT cables—namely that neutrality, quietness, dynamics, low level resolution and with excellent recreation of the recording space—but with far more body, soul and musicality."

Wow, I must be prescient. That quality must have carried over from another forum where it runs wild.
 
Never heard of them. Giant killers or just a boutique Giant? I already gave up a car to get these speakers, not much $ for cables. In fact, I'm now using Mogami (not kidding).

Bring them in February! :)

Good for you- better speakers always trumps wire!
 
Ahh, so you think just the speaker cables will make that much of a difference? None of the usual 'must use same brand throughout system' rules apply?

I'm currently using MIT Oracle SHD 90's. How would these compare sonically? For example, if Transparent are generous in the mid-bass/midrange region and MIT focuses on extension (with a rather lean mid-bass) where would the Viero's fall?

Good question. I believe in audio blocks of cables: 1) Phono; 2) IC; and 3) Speaker cables. So no, I don't necessarily subscribe to using the same cables throughout though of course there are maybe as many examples of it working as not working.
 
Nevermind, Myles, I missed this line when I first read your review:

"Sonically, these cables share much in common with the top tier MIT cables—namely that neutrality, quietness, dynamics, low level resolution and with excellent recreation of the recording space—but with far more body, soul and musicality."


Madfloyd, This is precisely the quote that caught my attention in the review. IMO, that would be a very good thing, as I have always found MIT lacking in those areas. The other thing is that in my experience, MIT cables play with phase and those different "poles of articulation" settings radically alter the sense of space, tonality and imaging. So as far as "recording space" goes, with the top MIT cables, it can be what ever you want it to be. Quite an effect, IMO. I preferred the lowest setting in all of my MIT speaker cable auditions.

"Body, tonal balance, soul, musicality," all of those things can be adjusted through careful speaker and seating positions, in my experience.

Sorry, back to the M Project topic....
 
Holy Hell those are sick!! Outstanding Ian! +2 on the request for additional pics (when you have a moment) and further impressions once they've settled a bit.
 
Madfloyd, This is precisely the quote that caught my attention in the review. IMO, that would be a very good thing, as I have always found MIT lacking in those areas. The other thing is that in my experience, MIT cables play with phase and those different "poles of articulation" settings radically alter the sense of space, tonality and imaging. So as far as "recording space" goes, with the top MIT cables, it can be what ever you want it to be. Quite an effect, IMO. I preferred the lowest setting in all of my MIT speaker cable auditions.

"Body, tonal balance, soul, musicality," all of those things can be adjusted through careful speaker and seating positions, in my experience.

Sorry, back to the M Project topic....

+1 I demoed some expensive MIT Oracle ICs and SCs in my system for awhile and the positives were outstanding resolution and dynamics, a big sound stage and precise imaging. The major negative was that they sounded too analytical for my taste. I sent them back and ended up buying Cardas, which were less stunning but more natural and musical.

Ken
 
Holy Hell those are sick!! Outstanding Ian! +2 on the request for additional pics (when you have a moment) and further impressions once they've settled a bit.

Michael, long time no see! I have S5s now, too, and am drooling over the gorgeous M Projects of Ian's!!
 
Back
Top