Yes. That is it. Warning though, I have a feeling my stock cable was flawed. I believe the C3 cable to be of high quality and an excellent value for the price. However, I doubt very much I would have seen this kind of dramatic improvement if there wasn't something wrong with my stock cable. I've heard over and over that cables are for getting that last couple percent. Where my improvement was night and day.
Thanks for that. I'm currently using a balanced Q-Cable French Silk with my 2016 XCs into my Liquid Carbon amp, but haven't had enough adequate listening time to tell if the treble harshness is too much.
The Liquid Carbon is warmer and does tame that treble a little, so maybe I'll be ok as is.
If the treble harshness is getting to me still though, I might think about the C3 cable. So thanks!
Yes. That is it. Warning though, I have a feeling my stock cable was flawed. I believe the C3 cable to be of high quality and an excellent value for the price. However, I doubt very much I would have seen this kind of dramatic improvement if there wasn't something wrong with my stock cable. I've heard over and over that cables are for getting that last couple percent. Where my improvement was night and day.
I had the same exact experience when changing over from the stock cable to the WyWires Red cable. It was a marked and dramatic audible difference (to me) and I felt the clarity was immediately noticeable (to me). Multiple back and forth testing confirmed it (for me).
This is exactly why I bought C3 cables, the stock is 10 feet long and I had trouble keeping my chair from rolling over it. The 5' version is perfect for me.
I had the same exact experience when changing over from the stock cable to the WyWires Red cable. It was a marked and dramatic audible difference (to me) and I felt the clarity was immediately noticeable (to me). Multiple back and forth testing confirmed it (for me).
Do you think there was a problem with the stock cable or do you think the new cable was just that much superior or a better fit with your set up? I'm still a little mystified with the transformation of my XC's. I upgraded cables for my Senn HD800S and hardly noticed a difference, but as you say, the difference was dramatic with the XC.
Do you think there was a problem with the stock cable or do you think the new cable was just that much superior or a better fit with your set up? I'm still a little mystified with the transformation of my XC's. I upgraded cables for my Senn HD800S and hardly noticed a difference, but as you say, the difference was dramatic with the XC.
I never considered that the cable would be faulty. I just assumed that the upgraded cable was better. It really was surprising at the amount of difference. There are many happy people with upgraded cables here (if I remember correctly). Not sure I've heard a lot of people being vocal about how much they love their stock cables over after market. I would go with your option "2".
So I have read several posts on this thread about the new 2016 XC drivers but really nothing on the highs. I really wanted to like the XC's but the older versions really gave me fatigue from my already bad issue with tinnitus. Someone that has had a pair of the latest XC's with the latest drivers tell me if the highs are toned down or not? I guess comparing to the older versions
So I have read several posts on this thread about the new 2016 XC drivers but really nothing on the highs. I really wanted to like the XC's but the older versions really gave me fatigue from my already bad issue with tinnitus. Someone that has had a pair of the latest XC's with the latest drivers tell me if the highs are toned down or not? I guess comparing to the older versions
I would say that the highs have stayed the same, if not more prominent, in my opinion. I can't tell you why though, just that if the old XCs gave your fatigue, the new drivers would not control the problem for you. I personally found the highs to be 'hotter', by a small margin.
Keep in mind that is not a direct comparison, I have the 16 version now and used to have the old version.
When I got the new versions in the mail, I remember thinking, 'I don't remember the highs being so prominent'.
I'd be interested to know if anyone else was in the same boat, or could shed some light - perhaps it is not a change to the highs, but change to bass/mid areas that are affecting the upper end?
I had the original version now I have the 2016 version due to driver failure. To me the biggest improvement was the taming of the 1-2 KHz peak which had been grating on my ears. The 100-300 Hz peak was also reduced and as a result I am turning them up louder now. Now I hear better sub-bass and high end over 5 KHz. IMHO
In my experience, piercing highs are related to a lot of other factors other than headphone frequency response. First and foremost, the music itself: there are recordings which are simply more sibilant than others. Then other factors such as digital conversor quality, amp quality, AC power filtering and cable quality, digital interface filters and their power supplies, interconnect cables and connectors, fuses, etc. Each gives a little "less digital, more analog" sound that added all together make the system more true and less fatiguing, and more defined and less aggressive highs.
There is no replacement for careful testing and purchase by using a rolled off pair of cans. In my opinion, of course.
Try a smooth DAC, cooper + gold interconnect and headphone cable + connectors, a powerful class A amp, unshielded + gold plated AC cables + connectors, gold plated receptacle, if using USB a Regen + linear power supply, a AC power filter strip or conditioner. It all adds up. Avoid silver or silver plated copper cables and rhodium plated connectors and any switching power supply you may have.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
