I am using a Lexicon MC-1 with a B&K 7250 Amp,
and B&W 804 speakers.

The sound of this system is great, but I was always a
little frustrated at the dynamics during HT listening,
it just seemed a little compressed and lifeless compared to my old Yamaha receiver. Something just didn't seem right.
The guy at the home theater shop suggested I try different interconnects. At first I was very, very skeptical.
But upon trying the copper interconnects from Analysis-Plus,
the dynamics that I was longing for was finally there!
I could hear more detail in the treble, but at the same time, there was more punch in the lower bass.
I also tried the Silver Audio Hyacinth and also noticed more detail in the treble, but not as much lower bass extension.

All in all, I think the Audioquest Topaz is fine for music, but I would not recommend it for HT.

Cheap
Better than the standard cable

Rigid (a tuner will be moved around)
Flat soundstage
Harsh treble

It is about 3 years ago that i used the Topax interconnect and my system has changed quite a bit since. In fact it is only the rack that has not been replaced but it was good in the first place. My old system was (NAD 306 int. amp., NAD 514 CD, Dali 103 speakers, audioquest Type 4 and TOPAZ). I still remember that although the Topaz was better than the standard, it was NOT even close to the homemade silvercable: SilverSignalTape (which i still use!). When I compared the Topaz to the SST the SST was clearly better on all acounts: wider and deeper soundstage, smooth more detailed treble, deeper bass AND a fascinating ability to bring the music out on of the speakers.
I have tried the Topaz with two other CD-players (Marantz CD 67 SE and Rega Planet) with the same negative result.
Well i must admit I still have the Topaz cable, but only the cable I have reused the connectors for another SST.

I read about the SST on Stereophiles homepage. If you can´t find it then contact Doug Schnieder. He's the man behind it! The SST cost me about 20 $ to build!!!

Similar Products Used:

Homemade silvercable
Standard cable

Topaz is the same as any wires you can buy in a hardware store, don't waste your money on it and don't fool yourself by saying it improves the sound quality of your system. Price per value wise, I will pay pay USD 1/ft for it.

Did the same thing, the sound is warmer and better detailed than with Monster Interlink 300. It's worthy the money.

I replaced my monster with topaz as well. I experienced a big improvement. But, then I replaced the topaz with acrotec and got an even bigger improvement. The topaz was ok on top but very lean on the bottom.

Performs up to a price point, no giant killer but good for beginners!
Compared with cheapo self made cables, 100% improvement. Soundstaging acceptable and imaging good enough. It is not as natural ( not enough "air" around the various instrument ) and so focused compared with Nordost Blue Heavens though. If you have to audition a cable up to its price point, its worth a try. Have to credit it for not trying to alter the sound, just lacks the bit to free sound from speakers.

After a decent burn-in period, these cables came to life. I have them running between my cd-player and my pre-amp. They do a good job. Limited dynamics would be my only complaint in this price bracket. Much better than Kimber's offerings (IMHO) as they were to bright(maybe too much resolution). Tara labs makes a better cable in the same price range, however it's not to much better (spliting hairs).

I replaced my old cable with TOPAZ 2 and i was shocked about improvement that this cable did to the sound of my system.My money goes on Audioquest!!!Well done AUDIOQUEST!!!

I am very skeptical when it comes to cables, but I decided to see what all the hype was about. I brought home some Topaz at $65 (meter) and some Quartz at $175 (meter). I wanted to hear the difference between the double balanced and the (over kill?) triple balanced cable. I currently had some no name, gold plated, double balanced, thick shielded, 20 guage, "oxigen free" (impossible!) copper interconnects. Before I get into my review I will go over my components and comparing procedure. I used a McIntosh C-22 (re-issue) tubed pre-amp, McIntosh MC-150 solid state amp, Adcom CDG 600 CD changer and a wide vareity of speakers: Sony Mini System junk speakers, JBL Control 5's and Martin Login Aries i. I ran all these speakers on full range with my Velodyne UDL 12 Subwoofer as they all seem to roll off naturally at the UDL's crossover point. Why so many speakers? Just like a good component, a good cable should make any system sound better, Right?
So I started by hooking up the Topaz to the MC-150 by using the speakers one output on the C-22. The UDL 12 was hooked up with Topaz on Speakers two output. I then hooked up the Topaz from the CDG 600's fixed output to the tuner input on the C-22. I left my no name brand on the CD input. These were hooked up to the CDG's varible outputs. When the CDG's volume is set to 00 the varible outputs match the volume level of the fixed outputs. Perfect for direct AB comparisions. What is really nice is that the C-22 has analog switching with no delays so switching between cable A and B is seamless.

Do you know what? I did not hear a difference at all! Click... then Click back... I think I heard something... Click again... Not really! I think I might be able to hear a difference, but I really don't. And this is with the Areis i, the better speakers! I had my soon to be wife listen to it. She is a vocalist and has sometimes a more tuned ear then I do. "Are you sure you hooked those up? They sound just like the other ones." I then invited an Audio/Visual Art freind of mine over. "There is no difference, Allen, at least I do not think there is." With that, I tried the other speakers, with all three people over as listeners. No diffence! We then got the handphones out and tried it that way, still no difference.

There has to be a difference, something to persuade me that these cables are worth the money! So I hooked up my old cables on to the speaker 2 output on the C-22. I left the Topaz on the speaker 1 output and unplugged the UDL 12. I used Gold plated Y cords to plug both of these into the MC-150. This is by no means an ideal situation, but it allows for seamless switching between cables using the speakers knob. I left the Adcom CDG hooked up as before. We tried many combinations, but still no sound differences.

Okay, I decided it was time to go all out and try the Quartz, maybe I am not spending enough money! I hooked up the Quartz the same way as the Topaz, using the Y cord on the MC-150. All of us could hear a slight difference and I mean slight. The difference was like trying to spit hairs and none of us could say what the difference was. The clearity was the same, treble the same, bass the same, transperity the same. And above all, none of us could say the difference was better then what I had with my no name cables. So I am trying to figure out why so many people can hear a difference with this stuff. Is it just hype? Are people actually listneing to the music? Or do people think that spending lots money on cables will make their components sound better? Maybe, for some people that is true, but in terms of my McIntosh these cables did nothing! (Maybe I have not spent enough money!)

I am sure most people do not have the opportutity to hook up components for the direct seamless AB comparisons like I can. Another thing the comes to my mind is cleaning. All my no name interconnects are gold plated, however, if you upgraded from nickel, or your components are nickel, then you need to clean your contacts. I have also noticed a lot of people upgrading from monster cable. My Audio Visual freind brought over some monster cable (model 300), that is when we all heard a difference, infact that cable gave my sweet heart a headache. The treble was nasty on those, not to mention the muddy bass coming from the main speakers. None of the wire had any effect of the UDL-12. So I can see how a lot of people do like these Audioquest cables better- they do not color the sound like the monsters (very honest names). But in terms of my standpoint, you are just as well off getting some thick, gold plated cables, with "oxigen free" (excuse the misleading term) 20 guage copper conducters. This does not mean I am completely aginst the cable thing, because I do know that good speaker cable does make a difference. And considering I have monster 14 guage cable on my speakers, I think I will be upgrading that soon. Can't have that unlikable coloration now, can I! The best advise I can give anyone who is looking for cable is to not buy monster cable! As for Audioquest, at least for this mid-range line, I think they are built well and look pretty, but they are worth $20 for their sound.

I did similar test like Allen among 4 interconnects ( MIT T2 $130, Audio Quest Topaz $70, Audio Quest Ruby $115 and $5 no name brand ). My CD player ( Audiolab 8000CD ) has two sets of RCA outputs, this makes A/B test a breeze. The differences are apparent but not huge. Rudy sounds best by a slight margin than MIT, Topaz has tipped up high and less bass in my system. $5 does not have the resolution all others have. And at last, I decided to keep Ruby and returned the Topaz and MIT.