Stu's Interconnect Comparison
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1361 Registered: May-05 | I know this doesn't belong in the speakers section, but the usual suspects are all here more consistantly than anywhere else in the forum... Due to the conflicting contract issues between Best Buy & Monster and Magnolia Home Theater (inside Best Buy) & AudioQuest, Magnolia has all AudioQuest products on clearence. Appearantly, Monster sales have dropped by about 80% in the stores that have Magnolia and AudioQuest. For some stupid reason, Monster isn't too happy. After learning that Magnolia has a 30 day no questions asked return policy, I decided to do an experiment. I picked up a pair of AudioQuest Copperheads, and a pair of King Cobras. They retail for $75 and $175 respectively, but I got them for $35 and $85. I've had the belief that interconnects are all the same. If it's suffeciently sheilded from EMI and RFI, has a good connection, is durable enough and long enough, it should sound the same. While I've always believed that a say $30 interconnect sounds better than a $5 one, I've never believed that their's much more after that. What makes me second guess that logic is that a lot of people here that I respect do hear differences in cables. For the most part they don't believe price has much of a correlation to sound quality though. The more I think about it, I haven't really spent significant time around different cables nor noteworthy cables to be able to say for certain if I do or do not hear a difference. Up until this point, I've used a few Monster and Acoustic Research interconnects, and the standars issue free ones. I've heard a few compared in stores, but didn't have a real interest to compare them nor a true frame of reference. My current cables are Monster M550i from CDP to integrated amp, Monster Interlink 400 mkII from phono pre to integrated, and AR something or other from TV to integrated. I've briefly switched those around a few times without hearing any differences. Seeing as how I came across a great refundable deal, and how I've got 3 weeks of 'use it or lose it' paid vacation time with not much better to do, I'm gonna give the interconnect comparison a go. I don't have anything to lose. My focus will be from CDP to amp. I'll also try it from the phono pre to amp, but won't emphasize this much because the turntable has fixed interconnects that connect to the pre-amp. If the cables all sound different, it would probably be scewed by the different cables within the phono system. I'll try the pre-out/main in loop as well. I'm going to keep as open of a mind as I can. If I hear differences, I won't bash others who don. If I don't hear differences, I won't think any less of the people who do. I figure there's no better way than my system in my home with my material. Hopefully my humble system is capable enough to show differences if they exist. I guess I'm approaching this the right way. I don't have my heart set on hearing differences, nor is it set on not hearing differences. Improvements are always welcomed, no audible effects are looked down on, and everything in the middle is just a change. Whichever happens will be reported as honestly as I can. I appreciate and welcome all opinions, insight, etc. All I ask is that everyone keeps it civil and we don't resort to bashing each other. My system presently consists of the following - NAD C320BEE NAD 523 CDP NAD PP2 phono pre-amp Pro-Ject 1Xpression w/ stock Sumiko Oyster cart, Herbie's TT mat, and Pro-Ject Speed Box mkII Here are links to the various cables - http://www.audioquest.com/ (doesn't have direct links to individual cables, you have to navigate your way through) http://www.monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=114 http://www.monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=133 |
|
Bronze Member Username: StefanomSilver Spring, MD United States Post Number: 48 Registered: Apr-06 | Sounds like it should be interesting. I'm somewhat of a skeptic myself (copper is copper and all that), but I still believe in pride in owner ship and all that to a point (my interconnects are Monster THX-100 stuff and I use Monster speaker wire as it was convienent at the time). I certainly don't worry about what better wiring could do for me, and as pathetic as it may sound I did at one time with el cheapo 16 gauge from Walmart. In any event, good luck with your experiment. I look forward to the results. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1363 Registered: May-05 | Thanks Stephen. My cable, both speaker and interconnects, were also more out of convenience than anything else. I had Monster XP speaker cable for a while, then switched to comparable Acoustic Research because I needed a few more feet when I moved. I briefly compared them and didn't hear any differences. Not that that has any bearing on this experiment. I've head the same idea about a lot of tweaks until I came across a few that did work - speed controller for turntable, turntable mat, and Pledge Anti-Static spray for CDs. They sound absurd but have worked wonders, even when I 'knew' they wouldn't. I figure if I was wrong about them, why not try interconnects? |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1364 Registered: May-05 | Forgot to add... Speakers are PSB Image T55 |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1577 Registered: Feb-04 | What about Pledge Anti-Static spray for CDs? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2859 Registered: Dec-04 | Peter, that is an epic tale indeed! Word search the 'old dogs' thread and bring a drink! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8642 Registered: May-04 | Sp - There are two issues you should address. First, while your equipment should provide enough quality to make a broad assessment of the interconnects you've chosen to audition, keep in mind a cable is only a portion of a complete circuit. Some cables have a very different response when placed in certain applications. Cables with high or low capacitance, inductance or oddball construction might beenfit one circuit and not another. Cables are too often used as a BandAid to poor system matching in just this manner. Having other equipment to pair with the cables would help immensely in trying to find the basic character of the cables in question. Barring that option, the route of various placements within one system will have to suffice. It would also be beneficial, I would think, to have a much higher priced cable in the survey. With a 30 day return policy, why not go stick a top flight cable on the credit card. As is, you are going to be comparing AudioQuest to Monster, but your cable choices are relatively close to one another in the line up of both companies and relatively close to one another line to line. I wouldn't expect glaring improvements between two cables so closely placed in the AudioQuest line. Between their $75 cable and their $500 cable, I think you'll notice improvements that won't be evident in your current comparison. Second, it would be helpful to establish a baseline of performance. Having a single cable the others get compared to would be of help here, I think. Possibly the freebie to set a very "base"-line of performance. Then we need to know what you listen for. A cable that offers better depth isn't going to be evident if your system doesn't manage depth or you are not particularly concerned with depth rendition. Likewise, a cable which adds more metallic bite to a cymbal or woodiness to a violin isn't of value to some one who isn't concerned with those qualities. Which, of course, leads us to your baseline of relativism. Do you know the sound of a cymbal or a violin well enough to comment on whether one cable performs better in these areas than anoher cable might? In other words, are you going to be comparing the cables against a set reference point of real music? Or, will you only be trying to dsicern whether one cable sounds "different" than another cable in a particular circuit placement? |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1365 Registered: May-05 | Jan - You bring up some very good points, and I'll definitely keep them in mind. Where do I start? I'm aware that their may not be any audible difference due to the reasons you've stated. If I honestly don't hear anything, I'm not going to run around saying their's no difference. My opinion will be that I haven't heard any in my system, room, etc. Speaking of the room, I spent countless hours playing with positioning speakers, listening chair, and everything else in the room. I've finally got it where it's pretty much flat. I didn't let the attic get the best of me. Live music is always the ultimate reference. While I'll be comparing the cables against one another, it'll ultimately be which one sounds the most like live music. I've heard a very good portion of my catalog live, many on a number of occasions. It should be noted that the majority of my catalog is classic and current rock, which is pretty much always amplified. Also, having a 'small time' musician or two in the family, I've heard enough drums, cymbals, and acoustic guitar and bass to be pretty confident in assessing which sounds more 'real.' I've also heard a lot of brass and wood instruments to have a good idea, but I don't own too much of that type of music. When commenting on traits, I plan on listing tracks and albums. As to what I listen for, their's too many attributes to list. The majority of what I listen for should/will become appearent when describing what I've heard. For example - cymbals sound tizzy, drums sound like cardboard boxes, soundstage widened and deepened, pace rythym and timing were improved, and so on. I'm not trying a BandAid approach. I'm actually not trying to improve anything; not that things can't be improved by any means. I'm simply trying to see what if anything the cables will do. If it's a good change that justifies the price, the cable will stay. If it's just an indifferent change (which is rare) or a negative change, they'll go back. I haven't any idea what the strengths or weaknesses are of any of the cables. Quite frankly, I haven't really sat down and evaluated cables before in a serious manner. I could ask the charecteristics of each cable from you and the rest of the community, but I'd rather find them out myself without any preconcieved notions. I'll definitely ask others their opinions of my findings and I look forward to honest and intellegent conversation on the subject. In regards to getting a $500 AudioQuest, I bought the lowest line and highest line they had left. More expensive cables were only more expensive due to length or different termination (XLR vs RCA). I assume that there should to be audible diferences between the $75 Copperhead and the $175 King Cobra. The internal structure of them is different, and the RCA connectors are different. The King Cobra has 3 individual wound 21 AWG silver plated copper wires, whereas the Copperhead has a single 22 AWG copper wire. The King Cobra is at least twice as thick and heavy as the Copperhead, although I haven't measured them. The Copperhead uses an copper termination, and the King Cobra uses a covered silver (perhaps plated?) termination. The AudioQuest sight I linked to earlier has cross-sectional views of the cables and descriptions if you'd like to compare them. The site is a little difficult to navigate though. I was going to use a freebie as a baseline, but I haven't listened to it very much. I've used the Monster M550i for the last few years, so relatively speaking, this is my personal reference. I'll try my best to spend equal time with the freebie. As I said earlier, I've got 3 weeks of vacation time with no where to go and nothing better to do. I'll report my findings along the way and seek opinions and feedback in every aspect of my 'study.' I'm looking forward to listening and everyone's thoughts. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnubisBirmingham, West Midlands England Post Number: 35 Registered: May-06 | I'm sure there is a school of thought which considers that a set of unmusical sound waves used in tests tell us how well music will be conveyed through an audio system. Whilst even I can see that the sound of a cymbal is associated with a much higher frequency than a bass guitar, for instance; I'm more than willing to accept that if a bass sounds 'right' to me, then so will an oboe or cello. That's just me. Maybe there is much more to each instrument's character to make such blanket judgements; but since I listen mainly to rock music, I tend to listen-test everything with it, assuming the classical music will take care of itself. I'm seldom disapointed, apart from perhaps a few sound-staging/stereo depth issues. Stu, I think if you're not intending to keep the £100+ quid cables - then don't listen with them. Supposing there's a huge and favourable difference? Can you afford to buy them anyway? Hi-Fi is a personal thing and while a quest for pleasure and relaxation, if it goes over budget for the sake being able to hear Jimi-Hendix's ciggarette ash falling onto the neck of his guitar, during an energetic solo, it'll become little more than a painful neurosis - like a hunger that can't be fed. I'm not against improvement - god no! All I'm saying is that you should be sure you want something badly enough before auditioning it in the first place.... Just think what it would be like taking cables that you can't live without, back to the shop? Urgh well, maybe you're made of money, eh.  A/V |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnubisBirmingham, West Midlands England Post Number: 36 Registered: May-06 | So, Jan... would I be right in thinking that an amp costing under £400, with speakers around the £200 mark are going to have some sort of ceiling of sensititiviy to slight change? I've found environment and cabling makes some of the bigger changes heard - but my logic tells me there's only so much you can push and tweak a mid-range thing like a NAD 320BEE before the money on top-end cabling and bracketry is wasted? I can imagine something as huge, transparent and open as the Krell, for instance, with a pair of Magneplanars in a completely neutral listening space, might show up these differences in a more magnified sort of way? I'm not having a go at you, Stu... just searching for a little perspective in all of this. There must be limits to grace, surely? Like would I be as fast as Linford Christie, just because I wore his shoes? A/V |
|
Gold Member Username: KanoBC Canada Post Number: 1015 Registered: Oct-04 | With what you've selected won't the comparison come down to a copper vs. silver comparison? I've read several testimonials from user's opinions I trust that silver sounds different than copper, not better in every listener's ears, but different. BTW those King Cobra babies sound nice, and the price sounds good, I bet they'd retail for $500 up here where I live. Maybe the difference between silver and bronze interconnects is not as disparate as with speaker cable, but IMO keeping the wire copper would give better results. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnubisBirmingham, West Midlands England Post Number: 37 Registered: May-06 | I'm really pleased to see you doing this though, Stu. It's not often we get a completely independant review of interconnects and I'm looking forward to reading the results. A/V |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3364 Registered: Feb-05 | There are usually greater differences between 2 cables of similar price from different maufacturers than between 2 price points with the same manufacturer. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1370 Registered: May-05 | Anubis - I am in a way putting F1 tires on an economy car. My humble system still has room to improve though. I've done some tweaks here and there, and have found improvements and/or changes. My 320BEE won't show all of the potential the interconnects have like the Krell you mention would, but it should be able to at the very least give me a taste. Also, I plan on upgrading my system in a few months. I'm looking into either a complete Rega or Naim system. Because I got them on clearence, if I end up keeping them and they don't work well in my next system, I could sell them for minimal loss. All - Listening is underway. I don't want to rush to any early judgement, so I'm still waiting to post what's going on. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1423 Registered: Sep-04 | Stu, I must say I was surprised to read this since I thought you'd bought a Naim Nait5i. incidentally, there are very few cables which work well with the Naim in my view. Very few indeed! I recall having done the test for customers in the past with Chord Cobra (£50) versus Chord Chorus (£200) in a NAD C521/C320BEE using quality speaker cable (Chord Odyssey or perhaps Naim NACA5) and the difference was very very noticeable. I don't recall whether they thought it was good enough to buy at the time. One interesting side effect was to compare same brand interconnects and then to compare different brand interconnects. It's then that you recognise that the same brand comparison shows a similar presentation which you wouldn't necessarily credit to a cable! Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3369 Registered: Feb-05 | Excellent point Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1372 Registered: May-05 | Frank - All excellent points. I'm still planning on buying either the Nait5i/CD5i or Mira 3/Apollo, depending on the head to head when I have the cash in hand. Most likely it'll be Naim. I haven't upgraded yet because I've been getting ahead of a lot of bills. It's a much easier way of justifying a $3000 stereo purchase in my warped mind. I anticipated the middle of July being my purchase date. I got some news a few days ago and have to put the new system on hold. My brother needs the money more than I need a new stereo at the present moment. He's done the same for me a number of times, no questions asked. My present system works just fine. Spending a few more months with it won't kill me. In regards to the cables and whatever system I buy next, I've thought this through as well. If I keep them (likely at this point), I'll try them in the next system. If they don't work out, I can sell them on the used market for little if any loss due to the price I paid. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnubisBirmingham, West Midlands England Post Number: 38 Registered: May-06 | Ah - clearance. Good man. I get all my cables that way. Can anyone explain to me how a 'balanced' line interconnect can have a 'direction' please? There is a right way and a wrong way to connect them. Why worry? Well, I'm just curious. A/V |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1425 Registered: Sep-04 | Stu, Don't forget that the Naim CD player comes with its own interconnect in the box, and I find that it is the best musical solution (though others will have better resolution - and Naim have just launched a new expensive interconnect) for sensible money. That's why I didn't think you'd need to do the tests... Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3371 Registered: Feb-05 | It wasn't that long ago that Naim introduced their long awaited upgraded power cord for a whole $25. Naim interconnects and power cords do work best in their systems. I was just in Portland last weekend listening to the Nait 5i...believe me Stu you'll want the Naim cables with their gear. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1374 Registered: May-05 | Frank & Art - I'm aware of the DINs and star grounding approach Naim takes. On paper, through what I've personally heard, and what others have reported, it's far superior to just about any RCA. Similar to XLR I believe. But it won't hurt to try all my options when I cross that path. Anubis - I believe the direction has to do with grounding. I haven't spent much time trying to find technical info, but from what I remember, one side (I believe source side) is grounded in a way the other is not. Voodoo science? I've no idea. After I get used to what is doing what, I'll switch them around and try to see if it makes a difference. |
|
Silver Member Username: Jamesp, Post Number: 166 Registered: Apr-04 | Stu, Thanks for the tip on the cables. Went to Best Buy yesterday and got a nice digital coax for half off. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 8655 Registered: May-04 | I've not run across any directional balanced interconnects. As a guess I would say the reason for directionality in a balanced line is the same as in an unbalanced line. Disconnecting the shield at one end might eliminate ground loops. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2870 Registered: Dec-04 | I believe you are right, Jan, and the shield is connected at the source end, in industrial practice. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1378 Registered: May-05 | I've been listening to the cables for about a week between my intergated amp and CD player, and here are my impressions so far - THIER ARE AUDIBLE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM Now that I've gotten that contraversial statement out of the way, I can continue... I'm not the most articulate person in describing differences, so feel free to ask me to elaborate on anything I leave unclear. I tried to give the freebie cable equal time, but it was worthless. Everything sounded very compressed and thin, and I had some issues with interference. Mainly EMI. Other than carry a signal (albiet it not very well), it didn't do anything right. Because of this, I used the Monster M550i as my baseline. The Monster M550i and Interlink 400 mkII were pretty much indistinguisable to me. The M series is supposed to be a step up from the Interlink series, however both of mine are priced within a few dollars of each other. My findings were the same across the board, regardless of what music I used. They varied in quantity; with some recordings it was night and day, and others it was subtle. The differences were always the same, it was just a matter of more or less. The way I went about evaluating the cables was I picked about 10 tracks that I listen to most often. I can't say they were or weren't my favorite tracks, because my favorites generally depend on my mood. I listened to about 3 or 4 tracks, 2 or 3 times (not the same track 2 or 3 times in a row then the next, but 3 or 4 tracks one after the other, then listened to them again) with the Monster, then the same tracks the same way with the Copperhead. I repeated this process a couple of times to where I felt confident in the differences being more than just in my head. In the same manner, I compared the Monsters against each other, Monster vs Copperhead, Copperhead vs King Cobra, and King Cobra vs Monster. Monster vs Copperhead - The first thing I noticed right away was where lead vocals were placed. With Monster, the voices are consistantly placed about half a foot to the right. This has really irritated me. Before the cable change, I thought it had to be the room. I tried countless times to reposition the speakers, listening chair, and other objects in the room. I finally gave up. With the Copperhead, lead vocals were dead center. If I was looking straight ahead, with the Monster I'd be looking at the singer's shoulder. Perhaps nitpicking, but annoying as all hell over the long haul. Now I'm staring every lead singer in the face. After this became appearent, I also realized that the rest of the soundstage was off in the same manner, but it wasn't as noticable. Because a drum kit sounds 'bigger' that a single voice, their's more room for error and therefore less appearent unless you're specifically looking for it. The Copperhead brought everything over a few inches to where they're supposed to be. In comparison, the Monster sounded thin. The Copperhead sounded fuller. This is probably the hardest thing for me to describe. In this regard, I don't mean that the soundstage was wider, deeper, etc., I just mean that their seems to be more music and more musical weight. I also don't mean to imply that music sounded richer or more organic (again, in this regard), there was just more music coming through. The Copperhead sounds cleaner. Their's less muddiness in everything, highs, mids, and lows. Everything sounded more natural, but not in a change in tone sort of way. It's kind of like comparing two pictures - one being slightly out of focus, and the other being sharper. One is fuzzy around the edges, and the other has clear defined lines. This didn't make the sound brighter, warmer, or anything else like that. It just made it sound more transparent, cleaner, and focused. The Copperhead's soundstage depth, width, and height were slightly better than the Monster. The Monster does a pretty good job of this, and I didn't have any complaints. If I were writting for a professional publication, the differences would barely be worthy of a footnote. The Copperhead's imaging was better. As I mentioned earlier, the soundstage shifted to the center, rather than being slightly off to the right. Everything has a better sense of space and the sizes are more proportional, but it's not an in your face difference. Again, the Monster did a good job of this; the Copperhead just did it a little better. From my point of view, all of these differences aren't in your face, outright differences. Individually, they're all somewhat subtle. The sum is greater than the parts though. If this were someone else's system and room, I might not have noticed most of them. It would have probably just sounded a little cleaner. Having listened to my system on a daily basis for the last two years, the differences are obvious. The differences aren't component upgrade differences. It's definitely not enough to BandAid faults within components for the long term. The faults within my system are still there. They're just not to the same extent as they were before. I'm still listening and comparing. I'm using different material, but the differences are still the same. Some material makes the differences more obvious that others. When I have more time, answered some questions, and have clarified my findings, I'll let everyone know my findings on the King Cobra. I haven't used the cables with any other sources yet. I'll finish my evaluation with my turntable. Again, it has fixed interconnects going from the table to the phono pre-amp. This will most likely throw things off, but it's still worth a shot. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1381 Registered: May-05 | A good analogy came to mind after thinking about what I've wrote. Imagine taking two pictures of the same scene. Same camera, ink, and paper. Different lens. The the colors aren't any more or less vibrant or saturated. Their's just more depth to the picture. The focus isn't more forward, or laid back. It's just finer. Their's less bleeding and blurring around the edges of the objects. If you just flip through a photo album and see the two pictures, you'll think they're duplicates. If you look at the picture everyday, sometimes for a few hours at a time, the differences become pretty appearent. It's truer to it's source. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3374 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks Stu. Appreciate your efforts. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1383 Registered: May-05 | No problem Art. Thanks for reading. |
|
Bronze Member Username: AnubisBirmingham, West Midlands England Post Number: 40 Registered: May-06 | Well Stu, for someone who complains of not being the most articulate person, your post makes totally concise, clear and informative reading. So much so, I think it's worth printing out for future reference. I'd like to thank you for sharing your findings with us. Happy listening, A/V |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1436 Registered: Sep-04 | Thanks for the review Stu. I will be very interested to read the difference to the King Cobra. This is, I think, where things begin to get interesting. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1409 Registered: May-05 | I've been pretty busy the last few days, and didn't have time to post. I'm not going to comment too much on the differences between the Monster cables and the King Cobra in an effort to avoid redundancy. The differences between the King Cobra and Monster were more or less the same as the differences between the Copperhead and Monster, it just brought the differences to another level. Copperhead vs. King Cobra - As Frank said, this is where things got interesting. They both had a very similar 'house sound,' if you will. Tonality was the same. One cable wasn't brighter, warmer, etc. I don't know if the differences were due to copper vs silver, or the internal structures being different. I'd imagine it's a little of both. All too often, where their's an upside in one area, their's an equal downside in another. Not so here. Everything the Copperhead did, the King Cobra did better. Like the difference between the Copperhead and Monster, the King Cobra sounded fuller compared to the Copperhead. Their was more music coming from the speakers than their was with the Copperhead. The sound was cleaner, tighter, and more focused than the Copperhead, yet didn't get clinical or overly articulate in any way. What I think happened is that the King Cobra has shorter or better attack and decay times. The begining and end of notes were sharper and had less overhang. I don't mean to imply they were edgy or thin, but rather less exagerrated. It simply sounded more real. It also had better pace, rythym, and timing, which I'm assuming is due to the better attack and decay times. Along those lines, the King Cobra seemed faster. This really became appearent with cymbals. I noticed on several occasions that the drummer was hitting the cymbal a couple of times, instead of just once. I actually started writting down track times of when I heard multiple cymbal hits and thought it was a single hit previously, and put the Copperhead back into the system and listened again. 8 out of 10 times, the cymbal sounded like it was hit once with the Copperhead, whereas it was actually hit a number of times when I used the King Cobra again. To see how much faster the King Cobra was, I borrowed a CD from a friend that I hadn't listened to since junior high - Slayer's Reign In Blood. I must admit that I was a big fan then, but really have no interest now. That CD has the fastest drumming I've ever heard. The remastered version's sound quality isn't too bad on certain tracks. Overall, the drum sound quality is better than anything else, can be quite good depending on the track, and even better during drum solos. This really my only focus on the CD. With the King Cobra, you could hear more of a difference in the drums during drum rolls than with the Copperhead. Again, where cymbals seemed like they were being hit once with the Copperhead, they were often being it several times when the King Cobra was in the system. Same for the drum heads, but not as often. I wrote down track times to confirm this too. I'd imagine this to be the case with pretty much every CD I have, maybe to a lesser extent, but I didn't feel the need to keep writting down track times. At first, bass seemed somewhat rolled off. After a little while, it was obvious that it was cleaner and tighter. It was faster, cleaner, and perhaps slightly deeper. For you vinyl heads out there, it was similar to the bass when using a speed controller on your turntable. Soundstage height, width, etc. were probably a little better, but not obviously so. Instruments had a little better space around them. Imaging was better. Instruments and voices sounded somewhat smaller, but realistically so. A drum kit sounded truer to it's real size and not exagerrated, as did every other instrument. While smaller, the sound coming from them sounded fuller and more natural. The previous analogy I used with a picture holds true here as well. The most appearent difference was the edges. Where their was a grey fuzzy line between objects, their's now a clearly defined solid black line. This time the colors were more vibrant and vivid, in a realistic and natural way. Throughout my time with the cables, every step up has been better transparency and resolution. More details were revealed. Surprisingly enough, it didn't once make bad recordings sound worse. Music was always more enjoyable, even though more flaws in the recording were appearent. That's definitely the best case scenario IMO. I think the synergy between these cables and my system is very good. I've recentlly found out (accidentally) that AudioQuest is owned by the same parent company that NAD is - Lenbrook. Perhaps this is coincidence, perhaps not. As was before, the differences were very appearent when using my music in my system. If it were unfamiliar music and an unfamiliar system, they wouldn't be as appearent. I think most people listening to my system would probably be able to pick out a few of the differences, but not very many. Because I know my gear as well as I do, I could pick them out easily. Others would probably have a little more trouble. Other than one recording (which I don't own, and would bet very few if any of you own), I haven't mentioned any specific CDs or tracks. I haven't really mentioned too many instruments either. The reason why is that they all benefitted the same ways, regardless of the CD, song, instrument, etc. Every difference was always appearent, regardless of what I was listening to. Some benefitted more than others, but they all benefitted from the same things in the same way. The differences still aren't component upgrade differences, nor are they enough to BandAid the faults of my system for a significant amount of time. My system definitely sounds better in every way, but it's not a miracle cure for my upgraditis. I think the benefits of the King Cobra are a taste of what I'm looking for in my next system. My system is closer to what I want down the road, but its still not even close. How do AudioQuest compare with any other brand? I have no idea. I haven't tried anything other than the cables I mentioned here. Relatively speaking, I don't know if my findings are average or extraordinary. I don't know if their's better for less money, or if I've accidentlly come acorss the best bargain. I can say that at full retail price, I'd probably struggle with which cable I'd end up keeping. If I were planning on keeping the system for a long time, it would be easier to justify keeping the King Cobra at full price. I would definately try the Diamond Back (sits between the Copperhead and King Cobra) to see if the differences between it and the King Cobra would be significant. I imagine the Diamond Back could be a happy medium between price and performance at full retail. With the price I paid, it's a no brainer. The King Cobra is definitely worth it's price. I'll try all cables in the pre-out/main in loop to see what happens, but that won't have any bearing on keeping anything. Neither of the two systems I'm looking into buying have a use for it. The Regas don't have jumpers, they have a switch. The Naim Nait 5i doesn't have a loop. Thanks for reading. Feel free to ask questions and/or comment. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MusicluvrPost Number: 68 Registered: Apr-05 | Stu, Great review! I have the AQ King Cobra as well and it's my favorite cable. I've been running them between my NAD C542 and NAD C372 for about a year now. Definitely experiment with the cables between the preamp/amp jacks. Keep in mind that the connection there will affect all of your input sources, so you might choose to use your best interconnect there. I have the 2" AQ jumpers that are designed specifically to replace the jumpers between preamp/amp in an integrated amps. Do you believe in cable "burn-in"? My experience with the AQ jumpers and the King Cobras was that they took almost a week of running them constantly before they settled down to sounding their best. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1449 Registered: Sep-04 | heh heh, told you so... |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1415 Registered: May-05 | LOL Like that's never happened before Frank. ctanaka - Thanks for reading. I'm sure the main loop will sound better. If I was keeping my current system, I'd look into the jumper wires you mention. I think they have the same internal wire and structure as the King Cobra. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3000 Registered: Dec-04 | I really think you enjoyed that Frank! hahaha |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 961 Registered: May-05 | Stu, Great review and articulation of what the major differences were in the cables. Makes me glad that I left my Monster interconnects behind and went in a different direction on my 2 channel. I'd agree that things got much more interesting after I did so. Let us know what happens when you play with the cables between your other components. Dave. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Mike3Lewisville, Tx USA Post Number: 14 Registered: May-06 | Stu, How is it coming along? I found a local Best Buy that still had a 1M King Cobra and bought it to replace the Nordost Black Knight that I had been using in place of my Creek's bridge clips (just like ctanaka). Since I cannot find AQ or other vendor after market bridge clips I use a 1M interconnect (shortest available on the KC). When I first switched it out the King Cobra sounded muddy or sludgy. Detail was muffled, lows were lower, and highs were absent. After about an hour it started to loosen up a bit and I became less anxious. After about 2 hours it clearly is a warmer cable than my BKs were with no loss of detail and the highs having returned. I will leave them in the bridge position even though it is possible that my Purist Audio Elementa (used between my Apollo and the Creek CDP input) may be a better cable. I try not to move things around any more than I have too and while I hoped for and recieved a better sound with the King Cobras over the Black Knights, I would not expect too much to change if I flip-flopped them with my Elementas. Further research indicated that it may take a couple of months to really get the best sound out of the King Cobra cable, similar to what I had heard about the Apollo from a local distributor. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1459 Registered: Sep-04 | Nuck (and Stu), It's just that there's so much stuff around by people who have gone to a lot of trouble to prove that "dere ain't on difference in dem der wirez" and I've had such significant differences with different kit, that I find it very satisfying when someone concurs that they make a difference. Incidentally, the differences become more significant as you go up the scale. I'm not saying more expensive cables come into their own further up the scale, just that the differences are significant enough to have a real impact on the overall result with the system. For example, with Chord Electronics amplifiers (most definitely high end), the transparency is so good that any colouration in the interconnect between the pre and power will come through loud and clear. When we first heard the amps properly, we were somewhat underwhelmed. It was only by changing around cabling (and racking) that we struck on a really happy combination of cables which just snapped the whole thing into focus and made the jump from 'good hifi but not that involving' to 'must have' (in my case).It's ridiculous that the cables could have such an effect on these very expensive components (we're talking $10k for an amp here) and yet, I guess if you put low quality tyres on a Ferrari, you're bound to pay the penalty even more than if you used the self same tyres on a Ford. I see it so often and it really bugs me. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1417 Registered: May-05 | Sorry guys. Between professional development (had to go to Atlanta), work that needs to be done around the house, and family comittments, I haven't been able to keep up with the thread. Some 'vacation.' Anyway, I've tried the pre-out/main in loop with all the interconnects. I could hardly differentiate between the Monster and the stock jumpers. The AudioQuest cables had a very similar effect here as they did between the CD player. If I were planning on keeping my current setup for a length of time, I'd go with the AudioQuest jumpers that ctanaka mentioned without thinking twice. Again, the gear I'm looking into buying doesn't have a use for them. I haven't noticed any 'burn in' yet. Maybe I haven't used each individual one enough yet. I don't believe in cable burn in, but then again I didn't believe cables sounded different either. You live and learn I guess. Still haven't tried the cables with the turntable yet though. Maybe tonight or tomorrow if time allows. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics