[stuartr]

I think Cardas even remarked on their website that the neutral reference is not the best choice for every system. They said that the neutral reference and golden reference were just that, reference: designed to squeeze every last ounce of detail out of a system. They say that the golden cross is a more musical sounding cable. It sounds like it might be to me. Given the inherent warmth of my speaker based system, the cardas let through that touch more detail that it needed to sound its best. But with a more analytical and neutral system (and I mean that in the very best sense of the word) like the HP-2's and the Melos, I found it was letting in just one recording/system imperfection too many, and I perferred the kimbers.
Carlo: I suspect you may have preferred the kimbers on your speaker setup as well because you are using the SR-11 speakers. When I was auditioning them, I found that they were a little more detailed than the B&W's, but in my system I did not find them as musical. I think that since they are already well-covered in the detail department, the kimbers' full tone sounded better.

As for methodology, I sympathize, but I cannot remember what the first cable sounded like if I have to wait 24 hours between each one...As for break-in, both cables were obtained (well) used, and the HP-2's and melos have also reached middle-age. The rest of the system was either used or well-broken in as well. For the tests with the melos, I was using it directly from the cd player, and the melos is a passive preamp, with it's pho-tentiometer claiming to be the most passive line stage in existence since there are no mechanical parts in the volume control (don't ask me, I don't get it, it's just what it says in the manual). For their part, the HP-1000s are widely regarded as the most neutral headphones in existence. Whether or not they are the best is another argument. I would not call the B&W 805s particularly neutral, but they are great speakers, and very musical. Once again, I think it all boils down to preference and placement. I have both of these cables, and I don't plan on selling either. I just have them in different places. You cannot really go wrong with either of these cables; something that is reassuring considering their price!

 

[jude]

[size=xx-small] Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr ....Given the inherent warmth of my speaker based system, the cardas let through that touch more detail that it needed to sound its best. But with a more analytical and neutral system....I found it was letting in just one recording/system imperfection too many....

[/size]stuartr, your experience with the Neutral Reference has been very consistent with mine. In trying the Neutral Reference with many different setups, it has definitely erred more often on the side of analytical than not. It has also been very picky this way for me; but, man, when I find a synergy for it, it's on. And when it's on, it's easily one of my favorite interconnects.

Some time down the road, I'll give the Kimber Select 1030 a run, as it also has a very sterling reputation in audio enthusiast circles (and I have very little experience with Kimber products).

 

[Stoney]

The issue of methodology is the main reason people disagree about audio. Most people (those with normal hearing, about 80% of us) agree on sonic assessments when listening in a controlled environment (Toole, Olive, et al). The difficulty is setting up an experiment to tell how components sound, and which is "better."

Most people leave their cables as the last thing to purchase for a system, so they end up using them as tone controls. That is fine if that is how you approach it, but we need to distinguish between shopping and reviewing. A review is intended to have generalizable results.

Some people do not select cables as the last step or use them to compensate for other aspects of the system.

As for break-in, this applies to mechanical settling of older cables that have been moved more than just a little. See my previous message and the links therein.

For example, I took a length of MIT cables (the best at the time) home from a client's house, and hooked them up, but they were brighter than anything Radio Shack has ever sold (much cleaner, but bright). Running them for 24 hours from a tuner resulted in a beautiful, layered, truly high-end sound.

As for not remembering how something sounds over 24 hour periods, there I have a problem. If you can't "remember" how it sounds, then I don't think you are listening the same way I and my wife do, which is using live music as a reference. You don't forget what a live string quartet sounds like, or a jazz band. What you say earmarks you as someone who perhaps either hasn't a neutral enough system to be able to use live music as a reference, or who doesn't use that aural distinction in your evaluations.

I fall into this sometimes myself, but not my wife! She will hear the stereo after having been on the road for a week, and tell immediately that something is "wrong," something that I am struggling to isolate after hours of listening. My problem is that I listen for differences; she listens for music. The former is analytical and shuts off most of the automatic sonic interpreting neurology that we are born with; the latter takes in all those instinctive, unreflective, automatic listening skills. My way of working around it sometimes is to read, or otherwise distract myself, then I see what aspects of the music "call attention to themselves" while I am not paying "attention" to the "sound".

If you can't characterize differences over a day or two of separation, then maybe they aren't very big, or aren't very detectable to you, personally. Or you are trying to hard to analyze it. ;^)

Quote:

the HP-1000s are widely regarded as the most neutral headphones in existence.

First, I was saying that headphones aren't the best for hearing differences, irrespective of headphones. Since our neurology has evolved over the millenia (and during our lifetime) to detect sounds in real space, it turns out that we are way better at recognizing sonic differences with speakers than with headphones. Of course, if I don't trust my system in the first place, because I know it to be colored or less than high-end, then I might turn to headphones, but probably only to identify differences, not better/worse. Headphones of the very best kind are more colored than a good speaker system. And we are far better at detecting it in the speaker system. This is why headphones aren't very flat or very similar in frequency response, whereas speakers tend to be converging on flat.

Second, Grado's are not "widely" acknowledged to be the best, or even flat. They are verrry enjoyable! They are a top seller. But they are not intended to be, or are they bought as, a neutral analytical tool.

Now, all this is irrelevant if you are just selecting cables for your system, rather than rendering a broader assessment! In which case... nevermind! ;^)

 

[Todd R]

Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr They said that the neutral reference and golden reference were just that, reference: designed to squeeze every last ounce of detail out of a system. They say that the golden cross is a more musical sounding cable. It sounds like it might be to me. Given the inherent warmth of my speaker based system, the cardas let through that touch more detail that it needed to sound its best.

I can second too. I've been living with the Neutral Reference and Cross for almost a year now and have got to know them well.
The Reference series can be too revealing at times. If your system is on the edge of too bright, the NR can push it over

The Cross is just as good as the NR, but with not as much high frequency energy, and a slightly wider soundstage (NR has a deeper soundstage).

But, like Stuart, my system also leans towards the warm side, so the Neutral Reference (interconnects & speaker cables) work out just fine at my house.

I'm bringing both cables to the Chicago show if anyone is interested in comparing them.

 

[stuartr]

Well, to respond quickly. The HP-1000s are not the grados you may be used to. They are 100% different from the current line. They were made by Joe Grado, not his nephew John. They are not RS-1's or SR-225's or anything like them. Try them, you'll see.

As for not remembering over a 24 hour period, I think this is a perfectly reasonable statement. Though I may not remember the exact difference enough to verbalize it, this does not mean that I cannot perceive a subconcious difference. I would be able to remember the difference if it were between something crappy and something excellent, but both of these cables are degrees of excellent, so the difference is very subtle, and, frankly, to a large degree insignificant. As I said before, anyone would be happy with either of these cables.
With respect to listening to live music, this is very much my background. I am an avid concertgoer, and I try to listen to live classical music as much as I can. I also play the cello, so I have a very good idea of how this and other instruments should sound when they are vibrating the air for themselves. If I need a reminder, I just take it out and play a few bars.

Perhaps I am using neutral in a bad way when I describe my system. The reason I chose my equiptment is because I felt it sounded the most like live music. I mostly listen to string quartets, cello suites and intimate vocal music. The Conrad-Johnson and B&W system does this better than any others I have heard in the price range. I think anyone who heard it would express pleasure at hearing it, even if there are better systems out there. I say it is warm, because in contrast to a lot of solid state systems I have heard, it sounds less sharp and edgy. The music sounds more natural and inviting. Is this neutral? I don't know.
As for headphones, I realize the limitations that are inherent in their design, yet I also think they can be some of the most involving ways to listen to music. I was listening to Rachmaninov's vsenochnaya bdenie on an old record last night using the AKG K-1000's, and I was getting goosebumps and an extreme emotional reaction. This is harder to get with speakers that cost a reasonable amount. Even the 2500 dollar B&W's could not do what the 400 dollar AKG's did.
Finally, this was not meant to be a scientific review. I listed it as a mini-review/comparison. I was basically trying to share what I felt was the difference between these cables to my ears in my system. I think I indicated this in my writeup. I appreciate your input, as it is a valid and insightful criticism, but at the same time, we should remember that this is all about how we hear things. This is the way I hear the difference. If it changes after 24 hours or so of burn in, I will certainly make a note of it in the thread.
Cheers,
Stuart

 

[Stoney]

Todd R:

That seems like a good summary. Well said.

stuartr:

I appreciate your comments. That makes sense to me. Sorry if I was coming off critical... I was merely being pedantic. ;^) Your post got me thinking about some pet peeves, none of which is your fault. Interesting also to hear your background. Your philosophy in picking a system is one I can relate to (vacuum tubes, Vandersteen 3A Sigs, search for a musical sounding CD, then SACD, player, big vinyl lover).

I wonder if, as a musician, you find that you like a bit more of a vivid detail than I, as a listener many rows away, might prefer? Musicians vary in their audio tastes. Some simply listen past the flaws and thus don't notice them. Others are acutely aware of flaws to the point of distraction. Sounds like you fall in the middle.

Anyway, thanks for the comparsion of the cables. I was actually curious about the Kimbers, which I don't have on hand.

 

[stuartr]

Well, I do play the cello on occasion, but I would not go as far as to say I am a musician, it's just something I do for fun. But I realize your comments were meant to be helpful, not critical.
I tend to be aware of the flaws, and I like to get rid at them, but not at the expense of detail. I try to get a detailed, musical system. I like to hear breathing, slapping on fingerboards, the bow sliding along strings and when musicians miss a note, but I would rather not hear a violin sound overly screechy, which can be the sign of a bright system (or a bad violinist! I make sure I know they are good when I use a recording as a reference...).