MIT Shotgun S 1.3 speaker cable problem

BlueFox

My MIT Shotgun S1.3 speaker cables arrived Wednesday, and I installed them tonight. Since doing that means pulling the equipment rack out, and trying to install the cables without futzing up anything else, I take my time and do it right. It really is a lot of effort.

So, after getting the cables installed, I turn the gear on for a smoke test, and guess what happens? Not smoke, but buzzing and popping from both speakers. I have two amps, and they both have the same symptoms.

Yikes! :eek:

Will burn-in cure this? I doubt it, so I turn everything off, and make sure I did not make a mistake, or knock something loose. No issues found, so I turn it back on. Buzzzzzz, pop, buzz.

Frack this!!!

I take them off, reinstall my old cables, and everything is fine. No noise, and the music sounds great.

I guess I need to contact Mr. Abrams on Monday for an RMA number.

At this point my suspicion is the MIT’s electronics were either assembled wrong, or they do not like amps in bridged mono mode. While it probably is the amp configuration that is the problem, I can hope the cables might have had the electronics messed up while being made. If so I will be happy to go through the ordeal of installing cables one more time to hear if they really make a difference.

I purchased the Shotgun S 1.3 XLR interconnects at the beginning of summer, and have been overwhelmingly pleased with the sound quality, and I was really looking forward to a complete end-to-end cabling system.

Oh well, this is all part of the audio game. There is always something.

reeltrouble1

Of course concerning. My experience with JA is he will act quickly to resolve the issue.

RT1

dorokusai

It has nothing to do with an amplifier being in bridged mono unless you have another issue. I've done that dozens of times with MIT cables.

Are you using tubes anywhere? It could be a capacitance issue as I've had problems with MIT and tube gear over the years. I've also heard firsthand of some SS gear not working well with MIT cables due to that same issue. I would hope you talked to JA beforehand, when you ordered the cables since he usually asks exactly what gear you're using in the first place.

It could be a bad cable....you just never now but it looks like you did the basic things in regards to generic troubleshooting. You should have done more but it's your gear.

BlueFox

dorokusai wrote: »

It has nothing to do with an amplifier being in bridged mono unless you have another issue. I've done that dozens of times with MIT cables.

Are you using tubes anywhere? It could be a capacitance issue as I've had problems with MIT and tube gear over the years. I've also heard firsthand of some SS gear not working well with MIT cables due to that same issue. I would hope you talked to JA beforehand, when you ordered the cables since he usually asks exactly what gear you're using in the first place.

It could be a bad cable....you just never now but it looks like you did the basic things in regards to generic troubleshooting. You should have done more but it's your gear.

No tubes, and I did tell JA what I was using, and it was in bridged mono mode. In fact, that was my first question. Not as to whether it would work, but I was curious if the cables would be able to span the width of the amp. In bridged mode the + is attached to the left outside speaker terminal, and the - is attached to the right outside speaker terminal. So we are looking at around a 15" span.

There really is not much troubleshooting to do. Cables hooked up per manual? Yes. Cables hooked up as previous cables? Yes. New cables work? No. Old cables work? Yes.

It probably is an amp issue, but you never know. This reminds me when I bought my SDAs, and an amp, from Good Guys in the late 80s. The amp lost a channel after a bit. I took it back and got a new amp. Same problem. After that I said, give me the Denon, and everything was fine.

dorokusai

Ok, yeah....it could be something very simple....who knows.I meant what you have alluded to....check the gear, swap around gear if you have extras. Good work BF. I've had some seriously odd issues over the years that never made any sense but the fix was what it was. Let us know what JA says and what you find out as it sounds interesting

BlueFox

dorokusai wrote: »

Ok, yeah....it could be something very simple....who knows.I meant what you have alluded to....check the gear, swap around gear if you have extras. Good work BF. I've had some seriously odd issues over the years that never made any sense but the fix was what it was. Let us know what JA says and what you find out as it sounds interesting

Yes, you are right. What I could have done, but had no desire to do, was put one of the amps back into stereo mode, hook up both cables to the same amp, and see what happens. However, I was now in a bad mood. All I wanted to do tonight is listen to some music, and enjoy the experience. Not troubleshoot cable issues.

F1nut

I had a problem once with some MIT interconnects not wanting to play nicely with my gear, but it did not result in buzzzzzz, pop, buzz. I'm thinking defective cables.

headrott

Yeah, that would be my guess as well. Get some replacement cables and I'm guessing they'll work fine.

Greg

Ern Dog

I hate it when new gear doesn't work the way it's supposed to. Hope you get it figured out asap.

Be sure to post your impression about your new cables when you got it all smoothed out and broken in.

txcoastal1

The biggest bummer is that it happened on a Friday and now you are left hanging....It happened to me when I received my first big screen few years ago...Memorial weekend and couldn't do anything till Tuesday...good luck

reeltrouble1

I would suggest at some point configuring your gear in such a manner so you can access things.

RT1

BlueFox

I returned the cables today. Monday I spoke with Joe, and he suggested a little more troubleshooting. So that night I tried ‘stereo’ mode on the amp, and that appeared fine. This was a 10 second does it buzz/pop, or not buzz/pop, test. Unfortunately, while the test passed, I do not need stereo mode cables.

I was looking forward to these cables since I expected an improvement. My other MIT cables with the iPod, stereo, and HT made a big positive, obvious difference, so I was expecting a similar result.

Anyway, there were no issues (other than a huge price difference between UPS and Fed-Ex) with returning the cables. Since it appears I can’t use MIT speaker cables with my amps, but I am in an upgrade and support the economy mode, I decided to use the cable cost, kick in a few dollars, and buy the Olive 4HD music server. Of course, this means I now need another digital cable to the DAC, which means I need another MIT Magnum digital IC!

To be more serious with this review, I want to say while I did not get a positive, or negative, audio experience from these cables, I did get a number of neutral/negative experiences.

First, there is no indication on either the cables, or the sparse documentation, as to which end goes to the amp, and which goes to the speaker. I put the “box” end on the speakers since it could sit on the floor. Being an engineer, and a MIT IC owner, I expected a ‘direction’. Bi-directional was a nice surprise.

Second, the screw-on spade lugs are not a good idea in my opinion, as they easily loosen up. I even tried Mapleshade SilClear on the threads to act as both a conductivity enhancer, and as LocTite, but they still loosened. Maybe the banana plugs are better, but I did not try that configuration.

Third, after **** on the spade-lugs, there is a part of the cable (some kind of pin extension) that goes past the top of the screw-on spade-lug base, and to the bottom of the ‘U’. This extension prevented both the amp and speaker binding mechanism from being able to screw-down onto the spade lug. After finally getting the first amp attached, I cut this extension off for the rest of the gear in order to make a more secure electrical connection to the remaining connections.

Fourth, the short pig-tails on the amplifier end were difficult to attach. After attaching one side, trying to manipulate the other side into place would either torque the already attached cable and loosen it, or end up knocking the amp off its vibration elimination brass footers. In my mind it would be better to have two separate cables run to the electronics box, versus short pig-tails going into one thick cable. I think this would make the cables much easier to work with. Whether it would affect the sound or not I have no idea.

Anyway, while this was a pain in the butt, as a QA engineer, I appreciate finding a bug with somebody’s gear. :biggrin:

dorokusai

You do know there is a locknut for the terminations right? It should be pretty obvious, since you touched them. SilClear is ridiculous and NOT Loc-Tite. Based on this and other threads, just stick to regular cable for speakers. QA engineer and you use SilClear....yet bash a mechanical connection? You must be awesome.

The connection is odd when it comes to MIT cables and I wish they had a better solution. The fact you have to work every point of contact, is annoying yet doable. The real problem happens when you have tight quarters and MIT cable is NOT forgiving. I've also found that in any high end, mid end or even modest cables depending on gauge.

I understand a little of what you mean but simply go to the next cable. I've tried dozens and will continue to do so even tho I like MIT....even tho Magnepan is my final loudspeaker doesn't mean I'm done listening. Final is for amatuers....audio is a journey into sound.

F1nut

You should have called MIT directly. Not a reflection on Joe by any means, but the techs at MIT know a lot more about what works or does not work.

First, there is no indication on either the cables, or the sparse documentation, as to which end goes to the amp, and which goes to the speaker. I put the “box” end on the speakers since it could sit on the floor. Being an engineer, and a MIT IC owner, I expected a ‘direction’. Bi-directional was a nice surprise.

They are most definitely not bi-directional. All of my MIT IC's and speaker cables are clearly marked.

Second, the screw-on spade lugs are not a good idea in my opinion, as they easily loosen up. I even tried Mapleshade SilClear on the threads to act as both a conductivity enhancer, and as LocTite, but they still loosened. Maybe the banana plugs are better, but I did not try that configuration.

Third, after **** on the spade-lugs, there is a part of the cable (some kind of pin extension) that goes past the top of the screw-on spade-lug base, and to the bottom of the ‘U’. This extension prevented both the amp and speaker binding mechanism from being able to screw-down onto the spade lug. After finally getting the first amp attached, I cut this extension off for the rest of the gear in order to make a more secure electrical connection to the remaining connections

There are small nuts on the threaded pin that you use to lock the connector, be it spade or banana, in place. They work very well.

BlueFox

Yes, the bag of goodies that came with the cables included 8 nuts. I will be the first to admit I am not mechanically inclined, but I do know that a lock-nut needs something threaded to screw down on. After installing the spade-lugs, there was nothing left exposed to attach a lock-nut. The only part of the cable exposed above the spade lug was the skinny, unthreaded pin part sticking out, and there was no way to attach a nut to it. While I might have incorrectly attached the spade lug to the cable, I’m not sure how.

Anyway, for a $2500 dollar list price, including a simple diagram showing the sequence of spade-lug, or banana plug, and lock nut to cable attachment combinations would seem appropriate, and helpful to those of who are klutzes.

Toolfan66

The lock nut goes on before the spade or banana then snug them up.

But it sounds like it's too late now..

dorokusai

BlueFox wrote: »

Yes, the bag of goodies that came with the cables included 8 nuts. I will be the first to admit I am not mechanically inclined, but I do know that a lock-nut needs something threaded to screw down on. After installing the spade-lugs, there was nothing left exposed to attach a lock-nut. The only part of the cable exposed above the spade lug was the skinny, unthreaded pin part sticking out, and there was no way to attach a nut to it. While I might have incorrectly attached the spade lug to the cable, I’m not sure how.

Anyway, for a $2500 dollar list price, including a simple diagram showing the sequence of spade-lug, or banana plug, and lock nut to cable attachment combinations would seem appropriate, and helpful to those of who are klutzes.

you're a crazy man Bluefox.