[Nogoodnamesleft]

https://www.lavricables.com/cables/ultimate-silver-ta-solitaire-t-upgrade-cable/

 

[evhvis]

I would like to hear forum members comment on this topic as well.

i would like to rephase the question a bit differently: On a 100 point scale (100=perfection), how would you rate the supplied T+A cables and the modestly priced Audiophile Ninja cables? Also, if you have had experience with the pricy Noir Hybrid HPC from Forza AudioWorks, how would you rate these on this 100 point scale. I am also interested in upgrading my cables but am not interested in paying an crazy premium to obtain the last 5% of performance.

Thank you!

Took the slow lane shipping so the Audiophile Ninja cables got stuck in customs for a while, but got them in the beginning of this week. I got one 3.5mm for travel use and one 4-pin XLR cable for home use. Both were an upgrade and I would rate the stock cables as sub-par when a cable as reasonably priced as audiophile ninja is a significant upgrade. They have a nice, but discrete finish, seem well made and I would highly recommend them as an inexpensive upgrade for the Solitaire T for wired use.

The main differences is in clarity and separation between sounds. The width of the soundstage is 10-20% better. The depth and space around sounds however get significant improvements with 30-40% more depth and it is much easier to pick out separate sounds from the soundstage. The focus of voices, instruments etc. in the soundstage is much better on the Audiophile Ninja cables and they have more presence. Bass and treble is a little bit better defined while small details and nuances are easier to pick up. Frequency balance is pretty much the same but when going back to the stock cables there is kind of a light fog/grey tint to the sounds on the stock cable compared to the Audiophile Ninja cables. Basically the stock cables are equivalent to turning contrast way too low on a TV.

I did get slightly more improvements on the balanced cables than on the single end cables which is most likely related to the stock balanced cable being 3m compared to about 1.8m. The single ended cables are fairly close to each other in length. The stock cables are very thin so they most likely have too small wires and very little insulation between the 4 wires. I still am surprised how most headphone manufacturers skimp on the cables on expensive headphones when a decent quality cable is maybe 20-40$ worth of materials when bought in the quantities that a large manufacturer would buy in.

 

[angelom]

The main differences is in clarity and separation between sounds. The width of the soundstage is 10-20% better. The depth and space around sounds however get significant improvements with 30-40% more depth and it is much easier to pick out separate sounds from the soundstage. The focus of voices, instruments etc. in the soundstage is much better on the Audiophile Ninja cables and they have more presence. Bass and treble is a little bit better defined while small details and nuances are easier to pick up. Frequency balance is pretty much the same but when going back to the stock cables there is kind of a light fog/grey tint to the sounds on the stock cable compared to the Audiophile Ninja cables. Basically the stock cables are equivalent to turning contrast way too low on a TV.

I'm a very sceptical person --specially more when speaking about cables-- so please excuse me for thinking that the percentages that you are giving, specially the 30-40% you speaking about, are imaginary or (in the best case) vast exaggerations and the result of a true case of expectation/confirmation bias. (I'm 99.9% sure that a real blind test will not giving this results at all, not even close)

For me is extremely difficult believing that a company like T+A, that already spending a long time and money designing and creating a very excellent wired-only and BT headphone, will not spending few minutes testing different types of cables and, if they finding GENUINE sonic improvements, not including this cables in the Solitaire T package. From a business point of view is too obvious.

Microphonics and similar aspects are entirely different aspects that don't impacting necessarily in sound.

 

[John1948]

I'm a very sceptical person --specially more when speaking about cables-- so please excuse me for thinking that the percentages that you are giving, specially the 30-40% you speaking about, are imaginary or (in the best case) vast exaggerations and the result of a true case of expectation/confirmation bias.

For me is extremely difficult believing that a company like T+A, that already spending a long time and money designing and creating a very excellent wired-only and BT headphone, will not spending few minutes testing different types of cables and, if they finding GENUINE sonic improvements, not including this cables in the Solitaire T package. From a business point of view is too obvious.

Microphonics and similar aspects are entirely different aspects that don't impacting necessarily in sound.

I am skeptical as well, especially when it comes to companies marketing cables, including simple power cables, for thousands of dollars. In these cases, I suspect the main advantage is more in the realm of eliteness, than performance.

That said, my first impression of the cables provided with the T+A Solitare is that they are unbefitting of being provided with a premium product: They are obviously very thin and, at least in my opinion, are of inadequate length to be used with a home theater system when using the headphone jack. Hence, my search for better, and longer, cables.

Because of my skepticism of the value of very high end cables, I personally am more interested in a moderately priced cable that is longer and offers a discernible performance boost at a moderate cost. Perhaps the Audiophile Ninja cables could be appropriate in this situation.

 

[angelom]

That said, my first impression of the cables provided with the T+A Solitare is that they are unbefitting of being provided with a premium product: They are obviously very thin and, at least in my opinion, are of inadequate length to be used with a home theater system when using the headphone jack. Hence, my search for better, and longer, cables.

And this is precisely why in the last sentence in my post I saying "Microphonics and similar aspects are entirely different aspects that don't impacting necessarily in sound."

 

[evhvis]

I'm a very sceptical person --specially more when speaking about cables-- so please excuse me for thinking that the percentages that you are giving, specially the 30-40% you speaking about, are imaginary or (in the best case) vast exaggerations and the result of a true case of expectation/confirmation bias.

For me is extremely difficult believing that a company like T+A, that already spending a long time and money designing and creating a very excellent wired-only and BT headphone, will not spending few minutes testing different types of cables and, if they finding GENUINE sonic improvements, not including this cables in the Solitaire T package. From a business point of view is too obvious.

Microphonics and similar aspects are entirely different aspects that don't impacting necessarily in sound.

You can tell they skimped on the Solitair T cables just by looking at pictures of the cables they supply with their other headphones. Width and depth comes from stereo separation. There are 4 wires inside cable so both the copper wire and the insulation around them would have to be very thin to fit inside. You most likely get interaction between the wires due to too little insulation, which reduces channel separation in the stock cable. Having long thin wires in a 3m cable also doesn't help.

Me and others have written what we experience and at least on my end the difference is not subtle. You can blame confirmation bias all you want and imagine that everyone else is wrong and you are right if it makes you feel better.

Images below are Solitaire T and Solitaire T pentacon cables taken from T+A website. If the Solitaire T cable is top notch, why is the Solitaire P cable so much thicker?

 

[Daniel Johnston]

You can tell they skimped on the Solitair T cables just by looking at pictures of the cables they supply with their other headphones. Width and depth comes from stereo separation. There are 4 wires inside cable so both the copper wire and the insulation around them would have to be very thin to fit inside. You most likely get interaction between the wires due to too little insulation, which reduces channel separation in the stock cable. Having long thin wires in a 3m cable also doesn't help.

Me and others have written what we experience and at least on my end the difference is not subtle. You can blame confirmation bias all you want and imagine that everyone else is wrong and you are right if it makes you feel better.

Images below are Solitaire T and Solitaire T pentacon cables taken from T+A website. If the Solitaire T cable is top notch, why is the Solitaire P cable so much thicker?

1) Sol P is a Planar headphone not an efficient biocellulose DD
2) Sol P is almost $7k USD which is over 4x cost of Sol T.
3) There is a question whether such an efficient headphone as the Sol T needs a balanced amplifier.
4) Most importantly, the perception of a $7k USD heaphone needing a thick cable. Arguably the Sol T cable would likely be sonically and electrically similar to the Sol P. However, customers would revolt at the idea of a Sol T cable instead of what they chose.

I went with the Audiophile Ninja since I didn't want the excessively long T+A included cable. Also, I went Pentaconn purely for compatibility reasons with my various sources. I'm sure the stock cable is sonically the same, but the AN cable is prettier. That makes me happy.

 

[evhvis]

1) Sol P is a Planar headphone not an efficient biocellulose DD
2) Sol P is almost $7k USD which is over 4x cost of Sol T.
3) There is a question whether such an efficient headphone as the Sol T needs a balanced amplifier.
4) Most importantly, the perception of a $7k USD heaphone needing a thick cable. Arguably the Sol T cable would likely be sonically and electrically similar to the Sol P. However, customers would revolt at the idea of a Sol T cable instead of what they chose.

I went with the Audiophile Ninja since I didn't want the excessively long T+A included cable. Also, I went Pentaconn purely for compatibility reasons with my various sources. I'm sure the stock cable is sonically the same, but the AN cable is prettier. That makes me happy.

If balanced is better or not depends on the way the amplifier is constructed. E.g. my V226 is better from balanced than from 1/4" jack, but a single ended design can be just as good if the parts are better. E.g. transistors need to be capable of changing the voltage twice as fast to have the same speed, be able to supply twice the voltage to have the same maximum output power and several other factors. For portable gear the issue is voltage supply, which is why you often see balanced designs for max output.

I would say the Solitaire T is closer to medium efficiency, but probably works fine on most single ended portable gear.

Both me and WDitters find the Audophile Ninja cables to be better. Did you actually take your time to listen to hear if there are differences or did you just make an assumption?

Image below is taken T+A website showing the internals of the Solitaire P cable. A lot of the thickness comes from isolation between conductors and shielding of the cable.

 

[Daniel Johnston]

Both me and WDitters find the Audophile Ninja cables to be better. Did you actually take your time to listen to hear if there are differences or did you just make an assumption?

Of course I did. And there is no convincing difference to me. In fact, I'm with Angelom and feel the HQ mode (via AptxHD in my case as I don't know his BT codec of choice) is ridiculously close to wired performance. I highly doubt I could pick one over the other even if an ABX was possible. I'm pretty good at picking up compression artifacts. And, I do own some pretty resolving equipment/headphones.

Image below is taken T+A website showing the internals of the Solitaire P cable. A lot of the thickness comes from isolation between conductors and shielding of the cable.

That's understandable. The Sol P is a complete and utterly different headphone. I hear it is an absolute detail monster at the expense of warmth and natural timbre. Since the Sol T is primarily a BT/Portable headphone, having a crazy thick cable makes little sense from a manufacturer perspective. I can barely wrap the AN cable in the little compartment in the Sol T case.

That's why cable discussions are so controversial. There is no objective way to stratify cables and sound. It boils down to individual preference. That individual preference may or may not translate to someone else. I respect that you and WDitters feel the aftermarket cables sound better than stock. IMHO, YMMV, etc...

 

[evhvis]

Of course I did. And there is no convincing difference to me. In fact, I'm with Angelom and feel the HQ mode (via AptxHD in my case as I don't know his BT codec of choice) is ridiculously close to wired performance. I highly doubt I could pick one over the other even if an ABX was possible. I'm pretty good at picking up compression artifacts. And, I do own some pretty resolving equipment/headphones.

Do you mean wired as in USB-C or wired as in driven by external amp?

 

[Daniel Johnston]

Do you mean wired as in USB-C or wired as in driven by external amp?

USB C mainly. Using the onboard DAC/amp

Also, with an external amp. To be more specific, an amp/dac commensurate to the on board Sol T DAC/amp. I.e. DS DAC/SS amp. Think DAP.
However, I rarely use DS/SS sources and I usually use DAPs as digital transports.

There's no way that the Sol T out of the Woo WA8 is going to sound any way like HQ mode. T+A aren't miracle workers.

 

[avkauppi]

I can understand the cable discussion in relation to ST. If you don’t hear the difference between passive and bluetooth, why would the cable make a difference. But if you hear the difference and have high quality source and amp, the cable will make a difference. How big is the difference and is it worth the price is dependent on the listener. During the last days I have listened ST through Gold Note DS-10 and McIntosh MHA200 and I can say ST scales well. I use the original cables, but I’m convinced that better cables would bring value added. However, I’m not sure, if the value added would be worth the price for me. My other headphones include Hifiman HE1Kv2 and Denon AH-D9200 and they are also excellent with this combination and I have high quality cables for them.

 

[Daniel Johnston]

I can understand the cable discussion in relation to ST. If you don’t hear the difference between passive and bluetooth, why would the cable make a difference.

To be clear, there is a difference between passive into a high quality chain bypassing the onboard DAC/amp and using Sol T wired via USB C. A potential huge and obvious difference depending on your sources.

Wired means:
1) Passive meaning no onboard Sol T electronics used.
2) Using USB C which uses the same onboard DACs and balanced amp that the BT implementation uses on the Sol T.

My only point is that once you go beyond the preconceived notion that BT is bad and use the HQ mode, you'd be surprised on how close it is to the wired USB C performance and even to some wired passive sources. YMMV.

 

[avkauppi]

To be clear, there is a difference between passive into a high quality chain bypassing the onboard DAC/amp and using Sol T wired via USB C. A potential huge and obvious difference depending on your sources.

Wired means:
1) Passive meaning no onboard Sol T electronics used.
2) Using USB C which uses the same onboard DACs and balanced amp that the BT implementation uses on the Sol T.

My only point is that once you go beyond the preconceived notion that BT is bad and use the HQ mode, you'd be surprised on how close it is to the wired USB C performance and even to some wired passive sources. YMMV.

Thanks for the clearance. For me passive means no ST electronics used. As a matter of fact I have never used USB C -connection. I use ST mainly in HQ mode and sometimes ANC on. This is the reason for me to have ST. In passive mode I mainly use ibasso DX320 with amp14 with balaced connection. ST is the best travel headphone I know. The bluetooth connection is excellent, only LDAC is missing, but for my ears passive is even better.

 

[tassardar]

Passive is better just purely because there’s no way a properly designed external dac and amp will loose to Bluetooth and a amp/dac limited by the quality of chip and power supply. But is it a whole lot different/better, my experience is it depends. If plug into a low to mid tier DAP or dongle, maybe no difference. But once you go high tier, or desktop, where power is no issue and chip is not constrained, the sound will likely be noticeably different just on the basis of a different topology and quality of parts. Then again didn’t most of us buy this for the best BT headphone ? I do agree it’s probably also one of the best closed back of its price, especially if bass, speed and clarity is of concern, but I’ll still be on BT most of the time since that’s the purpose and there’s so many other cabled headphone choices.

But do cable make a difference? I’m guessing they make really small difference but not sure if it’s worth to pay a lot for it. To me buying a better amp and dac is probably the better way unless you are already endgame.