Mogami phono interconnects
Posted by: eagle3333 on 22 March 2016
A quick share for anyone looking for tt to phono stage to pre-amp interconnects. After reading about it here and elsewhere, I ordered some Mogami 2534 and 2549 in RCA/RCA for my Simplex/P75 and an RCA/DIN to take it to my 282. I'd also ordered a Witch Hat RCA/DIN. Existing string was, um, Monster.. First I tried the RCA cables to phono pre. Very significant jump in detail and weight without being too harsh/bright. Lovely tight bass. Vocals, in particular, became more forward and distinct. The 2549 was slightly warmer in my set up and that's what I wanted so it stays. Very happy. Then I tried the Mogami DIN 2534 (I wish I'd ordered it in 2549, too, for a comparitive - very cheapskate) which seemed to build on the weight without losing any of the detail. I lost detail and precision when I tried the Witch Hat DIN cable - though it was better than the previous effort and lived, happily, in the system for 2 weeks until I compared it to the Mogami.
Those two Mogami cables, built to order, beautifully made and finished, cost $56 plus shipping of $42. This has to be the best value upgrade I've made. It's just ridiculous. I've got SL speaker cable and do wonder how SL interconnects would compare; I wonder how the Mogami would stack-up against expensive cables from Chord and co. too. But, right now, I really don't feel the need to find out. I'd rather put the spare cash into vinyl. Hope this is useful! (I have no relationship with or interest in Mogami)
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by tonym
I make my own interconnects using Mogami 2549. It's a seriously good cable and betters other stuff costing hugely more.
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by Mike-B
........... I'm a me too with Mogami , all my IC's are Mogami, made to exact length to make for neat dressing , but more important to reduce the very low pF/m capacitance to next to nothing.
Agree your summary, I've compared to Hiline, Chord & others, not found anything that is better or more satisfying. I made them a while back & pre Sarum & SL, given a chance I would like to try a comparison, but they would need to be a bit special.
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by eagle3333
I can see why, Tony. I'm going to order the three remaining interconnects from them and see how they compare. For about £100 it would be daft not to try it..
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by eagle3333
That's interesting, Mike. I've not been able to compare but your findings just support the idea to change the lot to Mogami and listen to what it does.
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by Mike-B
When I compared, I found each cable was different, but different is not necessarily better or worse, thats why I said Mogami - in my system & to my taste - was more satisfying, its a balance of dynamics, frequency extremes & tonal accuracy - personal taste to put it in other words.
I'm fortunate that I have the trade skills that enable me to both make my own & experiment that includes various testing & measurements. I experimented with different lengths, DIN vs RCA & 2549 vs 2534 in star-quad config.. I have also experimented with various pre-amp PSU signal & power configurations. Throughout all were fairly conclusive & followed by the comparasons, its left me in a state of no ic-cable-upgrade'itis.
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by eagle3333
Agreed it's all completely personal and subjective. But I and my wallet are similarly happy that you've done the testing and arrived at this conclusion.
Moderated Post: Please ensure your posts comply with forum rules particularly with regard to discussion of modifications of Naim kit. Thanks.
Posted on: 22 March 2016 by mpw
try the Mogami 2803 - i think its waaay better than the 2549
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by tonym
try the Mogami 2803 - i think its waaay better than the 2549
I've a length of that kicking around. I did make an interconnect with it but can't say it was better than the 2549. Perhaps I should give it another try.
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by Mike-B
try the Mogami 2803 - i think its waaay better than the 2549
I made up some 2803 RCA's for a friend ............ way too thin compared to normal IC's, I would be afraid its a bit too delicate.
As a coax it can only be used that way, whereas 2549 can be used as a +/- pair & pseudo-balanced config with semi floating screen
Its not the best capacitance for IC, ideally it should be low ......
2803 =108pF/m core to screen (+ to -)
2549 = 11pF/m between cores (+ to -) and 76pF/m core to screen.
I was not that impressed with the SQ as it gave a bloated bass in both my system & his - both have full range sub 32Hz capable speakers
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by Richard Dane
Mike, I've removed a few posts of yours - you know the rules.
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by tonym
Thanks Mike, don't think I'll bother then!
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by mpw
MIke -B
thats where we differ in our hearing and perceptions... and thats why the audio business is strong because all of us hear differently.
Cheers !
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by Mike-B
Thats where we differ in our hearing and perceptions... and thats why the audio business is strong because all of us hear differently. Cheers
Not so sure about that mpw, we both heard the same & on two sets of speakers. He ended up using them on his office/study system driving some small Dyno's & he remarked they suited them much better. He went back to his original cables, Linn Silvers, after the main system experiment. The next move is Sarum's, I must give him a call.
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by eagle3333
Mike - I would, of course, be curious to know how your friend rates the 2549 against the Sarum if you're inclined to post. I'd love to hear that a $30 cable competed equally with a >$1k cable! Failing that it would be interesting to know where the improvements showed themselves and to what extent. Thanks. Ian
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by Mike-B
Eagle333, he (we) did not try 2549, it was 2803 vs his original Linn Silvers. I just called him & yes he is going Sarum for sure, but funds are tight for a while.
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by tonym
On my main system I use 2549 on my DIN to XLRs, and 552 to Supercap for the SNAXO, but Sarum Tuned Arays on Urika & DAC (the latter Super Aray) to 552.
Posted on: 23 March 2016 by eagle3333
I'll be happy to report on 2549 DIN to XLR and source DIN to DIN vs OE in the interests of upgrade path if that's permitted? Your Sarums are way out of my reach, Tony and I think I might be better off putting that kind of cash into upgrading my 250DR/SCDR to a 300DR. 552 stuff of dreams!
Posted on: 24 March 2016 by tonym
Hi Mr Eagle, my posting was more for Mike, but please go ahead with the Mogami DIN to XLRs and interconnect. The former is a considerable improvement over the stock leads and sounds better from the off, but does require a good couple of weeks before giving of its best.
Posted on: 24 March 2016 by Mike-B
On my main system I use 2549 on my DIN to XLRs, and 552 to Supercap for the SNAXO, but Sarum Tuned Arays on Urika & DAC (the latter Super Aray) to 552.
Sorry Tony, I read your post but life has been a moving target these last few days. We exchanged some notes when you made up your Mogami DIN-XLR's & remeber that you where delighted with the improvement over the Naim "3 core". Did you ever try the Chord (or other) DIN-XLR ??
Posted on: 24 March 2016 by eagle3333
Thanks & I'm pleased to be able to sit back and learn what I can from your joint experiences. Ian
Posted on: 24 March 2016 by tonym
On my main system I use 2549 on my DIN to XLRs, and 552 to Supercap for the SNAXO, but Sarum Tuned Arays on Urika & DAC (the latter Super Aray) to 552.
Sorry Tony, I read your post but life has been a moving target these last few days. We exchanged some notes when you made up your Mogami DIN-XLR's & remeber that you where delighted with the improvement over the Naim "3 core". Did you ever try the Chord (or other) DIN-XLR ??
Hi Mike, no, I've not risked trying the Chord STA DIN-XLRs. I very much suspect they're going to be excellent but as I'd need six of them I'd rather not know!
