AudioQuest Niagara 7000 vs. 5000
 

Has anyone done a direct comparison of the AudioQuest Niagara 7000 vs. 5000? If so, can you articulate the difference in sound quality?

Thanks,
Ken

I have not heard either unit. I’m sure you know this ...... from what I have been told, the high current amplifier specific outlets are identical between the 5000 and 7000; only the source, constant current outlets are different with the 7000 having better filtration/noise dissipation. The 7000 has isolation transformers whereas the 5000 does not. Now, how that all translates into how they sound is a mystery to me but I have heard people say the 7000 is sonically superior, not hard to hear differences.

FWIW, Garth Powell, the Niagra designer, has said that the 5000 provides 90% of the benefits of the 7000.

I’m also looking into the differences between the 5000 and 7000. They both make reference to this spec but I’ve seen both 80 and 90 amp references. Thoughts?

Transient Power Correction: Provides over 90 amps peak instantaneous current reservoir with reduced line impedance for current-starved power amplifiers, whether they incorporate linear or switching power supplies.

As I understand it the only difference between the AQ Niagara 5000 and 7000 models is that the 7000 includes an isolation transformer for its lower current outlets. Such a xfmr provides additional noise reduction and isolation for gear connected to those outlets. I've also read that with some gear (mostly tube) there can be some hum issues with the 7000, so in those cases the 5000 is recommended.

Pure speculation but I wonder how far off version 2 of the Niagara is. I’m sure they have learned a lot with version 1.

I asked my regional rep that very question last month .... of course his answer was there are no plans for a revision. I tend to agree with you, the 7000 was designed a handful of years ago, in audio years one would expect a v2 on the horizon.

I can speak a little bit about the Niagara power conditioners. The 7000 is much heavier. I have all my sources plugged in to the low current outlets. The unit has worked flawlessly. For my amps I use 1 5000 per channel. No sources are plugged in. I run them in standby mode. Although I run the 7000 in the engaged mode I have not noticed any increase in my electric bill in so doing. As far as sound improvement as you might imagine I experienced a significant improvement over my 20 year old MIT gear. My installation was difficult and time consuming. I did not have the luxury of comparing the 5000 to the 7000. If you can afford it the 7000 is definitely the one for sources. The 5000 is similar to a 1000 regarding sources. Again the 7000 is twice the weight of a 5000 but there is no difference in the high current section. I like these units and plan on keeping them for a long time as I did for my MIT gear.

My dealer told me that there is already a newer version/revision of the 5000 on the market, which has better capacitors (or other better components?).
I still have the rental unit there with the old components. My own 5000 is still in the customs and is already the improved revision.
But the dealer couldn't tell me to what extent all this is really reflected in the sound.

I have sort of a power hungry preamp that lost dynamics when plugged into a Denali. Thoughts on which set of plugs I should use in the Niagara?