Recently I have been trying out various unbalanced interconnect cables in my setup in the hope of bettering my sound without spending more silly money on cables. The test bed has been mainly between the CD player and Pre/Buffer. I thought I will write down my impressions of the various cables I had made and tried in my listening room so that others may make an informed choice regarding the sonic signature of these pro audio cables in a home environment. I have tried to stick to cables which can be sourced locally. The only exception is the famous Mogami W2549 cable which, as far as I know, has no locally known supplier. The length of 2459 that I have was sourced from the USA. This cable has quite a reputation among studio professionals and home audio enthusiasts alike. At the end of this survey, you will have a fair idea of how it performs compared to other, lesser known cables, and decide for yourself if its reputation is well-earned and worth the cost and trouble of importing it.
There are many amongst us who are cable agnostic and get their knickers in a twist at the mention of cables. This thread is not really for them but they just might find some useful information. It would surely also gladden their hearts that most of the cables used here cost about a hundred rupee per meter
The method of comparison is by subjective listening on the same setup - with only the Cable Under Test - swapped out, and playing the same tracks for each cable under test. This is purely a subjective listening test. No numbers, no graphs, only numeric scores to ease tabulation of results. So the results are not absolute, and are necessarily subject to the frailties and acuity of my cotton-eared hearing, the inconsistencies in my judgement, and are applicable mainly to a chain similar to mine, though I hope that they should produce similar sonic signature across more diverse setups.
The lack of objective measurement is an inherent limitation, and readers would be advised to note it. But it is not an apology. Home audio cable vendors rarely ever publish any measurement data. Also, those who choose to publish it don't really go beyond the perfunctory resistance, capacitance and inductance data. Some exceptional cases may harp upon the uniqueness of their cable's geometry, or their purportedly mellifluous connectors, or how closely the dielectric constant of their insulation approaches that of free air.
Be that as it is, no one has really established the relationship of the measurements to how a cable sounds, outside of some well-known facts (like high capacitance causing high frequency roll off). The pro audio sector is certainly more forthcoming in publishing measured data. So where available from the manufacturer's data sheet, electrical and mechanical characteristics of the cables are given - impedance per feet (or meter), capacitance between leads, capacitance between lead and shield, gauge and type of wire, type of shielding used, and dielectric material used.
For perspective, I have included a Crimson Audio (not to be confused with the more common Chord Crimson!!!) interconnect that is terminated with Eichmann Bullet RCA plugs (retails at about $430 for a 1m pair) and an Audio Art IC3 interconnect (retail about $100 for a 1m pair).
All the cables are terminated by either REAN RCA plug model number NYS373 (cost Rs 90 to 110 per piece depending on where you buy it from) or Amphenol APRC RCA plug (cost Rs 130-140 per piece), or Neutrik ProFi NF2C-B/2 RCA plug (cost Rs 1200 per pair). All cables have been sufficiently burned in before critical listening tests.
So much for my florid and verbose intro. Now that we've set the background and template, and highlighted the caveats and limitations, here's the first contender in the next post.
Gotham GAC-2 terminated with Neutrik ProFi connectors:
Say hello to the Gotham GAC-2 balanced mic cable from Switzerland. It has two multistranded copper cores, the two cores enveloped with a soft rubber-like dielectric tubing, which is further encased in two layers of multistranded copper shielding wound in opposite directions. The shielding is termed "Reussen Shield" by the manufacturer. The shielding is the best I have ever come across, outside of pro-grade RG-59 coax cables with dual woven copper braided shields. The outer jacket is a soft PVC type material. Like all good mic cables, this cable is supple and very flexible. I have not been able to find any info on the version of GAC-2 (black jacket) that I use. There is lots of info on the purple AES version. Having used both, I can tell that the analog mic cable (black) is different from the AES version. I think from the looks the cores are about 23-24 AWG.
Frequency response: this cable has a flat frequency response across the audio spectrum. It doesn't highlight or suppress any part of the audio spectrum. It has good extensions at both the bottom and the highest octaves, with a filled out midrange. The highs are sparkling, and the bass has heft and nice tonality.
Tonality: the tone is quite likable. The resonant strokes of piano keys, wailing violin notes, caterwauling sax notes, the twang of the acoustic guitar, the grate of bowed cellos, various percussions, massed strings and massed trumpets in heat - all sound quite palpable and present.
Resolution: with the right program material and audio chain, this cable resolves micro details well.
Soundstage width, depth and separation: well-separated voices in the lateral space. Depth is well-behind the speakers, with layering of voices. However there is a slight sense of being overwhelmed when program material gets complex and loud. It is not a breakdown but a certain mushiness creeps in, slightly degrading the quality of sound. But this could also be due to a limitation in the rest of my playback chain. Musical passages that are loud and complex are in any case a severe test on any component. My system not being a highly evolved setup, I suspect it isn't the cable alone but the system gracefully saying, "this much, but no further."
Attack and decay: good attack and gentle decay allows one to see deeper into the mixes and brings a naturalness to the music (acoustic instruments have characteristic decays that can be heard when played live, especially at close range).
Dynamics: handles macro dynamic swings well. Felt no sense of compression when the notes hit the fortissimo end of the musical scale. In conjunction with its good resolution, it is remarkably good at resolving micro dynamics, nicely filling up the music with the ebb and tide of musical flow.
I didn't find the same GAC-2 cable terminated with another (much cheaper) connector (Amphenol APRC) losing out on any parameter. It still had liquid highs, thunderous bass, and similar midrange. It also had the same kind of attack/decay, resolution, ability to handle micro and macro dynamics. And I couldn't hear any inferiority in tonality either. In fact I thought it handled loud complex passages with a bit more grace. So you know where to save nearly 1K of your hard earned money
Let's assign a score of 8 out 10 to the GAC-2 so that we can have easy to digest numeric score for the other cables. I started with the above cable as it has been used for an extended time. So it inadvertantly ends up being my yardstick for measuring other contenders.
Reference Lab RMIC05:
This too is a balanced cable intended for wiring up studio consoles. Made in Italy. Cores are 26 AWG multistranded copper, with XLPE insulation. Shielding is one layer of wound multistrand tinned copper. Jacket is Polycab, soft and flexible.
Frequency response: this cable also has a flat frequency response across the audio spectrum, with a filled out midrange, sparkling highs and weighty and tuneful bass.
Tonality: there is nothing to choose between this cable and the GAC-2. They're equally good.
Resolution: again very similar to the Gotham GAC-2, but a wee bit less resolving of low level details.
Soundstage width, depth and separation: well-separated voices in the lateral space but more bunched up than the GAC-2, rendering instruments and voices with lesser lateral separation. Depth is well-behind the speakers, with layering of voices. Probably slightly more adept at handling complexity and loudness than the GAC-2.
Attack and decay: good attack and gentle decay.
Dynamics: handles macro dynamic swings well, but loses out on micro dynamics. But, mind you, if one hadn't heard them one after the other (with the GAC-2), it would not have been possible to make that out.
The GAC-2 has more positives than the RMIC05. They both have their weaknesses and strengths, with the GAC-2 chesting it out to the ribbon for a close and thrilling finish.
The RMIC05 scores 7.5 out of 10 due to its slightly lower resolution and lesser ability to present a more coherent lateral separation. It is relatively more bunched up around the phantom stereo center.
More to follow....
There are many amongst us who are cable agnostic and get their knickers in a twist at the mention of cables. This thread is not really for them but they just might find some useful information. It would surely also gladden their hearts that most of the cables used here cost about a hundred rupee per meter
The method of comparison is by subjective listening on the same setup - with only the Cable Under Test - swapped out, and playing the same tracks for each cable under test. This is purely a subjective listening test. No numbers, no graphs, only numeric scores to ease tabulation of results. So the results are not absolute, and are necessarily subject to the frailties and acuity of my cotton-eared hearing, the inconsistencies in my judgement, and are applicable mainly to a chain similar to mine, though I hope that they should produce similar sonic signature across more diverse setups.
The lack of objective measurement is an inherent limitation, and readers would be advised to note it. But it is not an apology. Home audio cable vendors rarely ever publish any measurement data. Also, those who choose to publish it don't really go beyond the perfunctory resistance, capacitance and inductance data. Some exceptional cases may harp upon the uniqueness of their cable's geometry, or their purportedly mellifluous connectors, or how closely the dielectric constant of their insulation approaches that of free air.
Be that as it is, no one has really established the relationship of the measurements to how a cable sounds, outside of some well-known facts (like high capacitance causing high frequency roll off). The pro audio sector is certainly more forthcoming in publishing measured data. So where available from the manufacturer's data sheet, electrical and mechanical characteristics of the cables are given - impedance per feet (or meter), capacitance between leads, capacitance between lead and shield, gauge and type of wire, type of shielding used, and dielectric material used.
For perspective, I have included a Crimson Audio (not to be confused with the more common Chord Crimson!!!) interconnect that is terminated with Eichmann Bullet RCA plugs (retails at about $430 for a 1m pair) and an Audio Art IC3 interconnect (retail about $100 for a 1m pair).
All the cables are terminated by either REAN RCA plug model number NYS373 (cost Rs 90 to 110 per piece depending on where you buy it from) or Amphenol APRC RCA plug (cost Rs 130-140 per piece), or Neutrik ProFi NF2C-B/2 RCA plug (cost Rs 1200 per pair). All cables have been sufficiently burned in before critical listening tests.
So much for my florid and verbose intro. Now that we've set the background and template, and highlighted the caveats and limitations, here's the first contender in the next post.
Gotham GAC-2 terminated with Neutrik ProFi connectors:
Say hello to the Gotham GAC-2 balanced mic cable from Switzerland. It has two multistranded copper cores, the two cores enveloped with a soft rubber-like dielectric tubing, which is further encased in two layers of multistranded copper shielding wound in opposite directions. The shielding is termed "Reussen Shield" by the manufacturer. The shielding is the best I have ever come across, outside of pro-grade RG-59 coax cables with dual woven copper braided shields. The outer jacket is a soft PVC type material. Like all good mic cables, this cable is supple and very flexible. I have not been able to find any info on the version of GAC-2 (black jacket) that I use. There is lots of info on the purple AES version. Having used both, I can tell that the analog mic cable (black) is different from the AES version. I think from the looks the cores are about 23-24 AWG.
Frequency response: this cable has a flat frequency response across the audio spectrum. It doesn't highlight or suppress any part of the audio spectrum. It has good extensions at both the bottom and the highest octaves, with a filled out midrange. The highs are sparkling, and the bass has heft and nice tonality.
Tonality: the tone is quite likable. The resonant strokes of piano keys, wailing violin notes, caterwauling sax notes, the twang of the acoustic guitar, the grate of bowed cellos, various percussions, massed strings and massed trumpets in heat - all sound quite palpable and present.
Resolution: with the right program material and audio chain, this cable resolves micro details well.
Soundstage width, depth and separation: well-separated voices in the lateral space. Depth is well-behind the speakers, with layering of voices. However there is a slight sense of being overwhelmed when program material gets complex and loud. It is not a breakdown but a certain mushiness creeps in, slightly degrading the quality of sound. But this could also be due to a limitation in the rest of my playback chain. Musical passages that are loud and complex are in any case a severe test on any component. My system not being a highly evolved setup, I suspect it isn't the cable alone but the system gracefully saying, "this much, but no further."
Attack and decay: good attack and gentle decay allows one to see deeper into the mixes and brings a naturalness to the music (acoustic instruments have characteristic decays that can be heard when played live, especially at close range).
Dynamics: handles macro dynamic swings well. Felt no sense of compression when the notes hit the fortissimo end of the musical scale. In conjunction with its good resolution, it is remarkably good at resolving micro dynamics, nicely filling up the music with the ebb and tide of musical flow.
I didn't find the same GAC-2 cable terminated with another (much cheaper) connector (Amphenol APRC) losing out on any parameter. It still had liquid highs, thunderous bass, and similar midrange. It also had the same kind of attack/decay, resolution, ability to handle micro and macro dynamics. And I couldn't hear any inferiority in tonality either. In fact I thought it handled loud complex passages with a bit more grace. So you know where to save nearly 1K of your hard earned money
Let's assign a score of 8 out 10 to the GAC-2 so that we can have easy to digest numeric score for the other cables. I started with the above cable as it has been used for an extended time. So it inadvertantly ends up being my yardstick for measuring other contenders.
Reference Lab RMIC05:
This too is a balanced cable intended for wiring up studio consoles. Made in Italy. Cores are 26 AWG multistranded copper, with XLPE insulation. Shielding is one layer of wound multistrand tinned copper. Jacket is Polycab, soft and flexible.
Frequency response: this cable also has a flat frequency response across the audio spectrum, with a filled out midrange, sparkling highs and weighty and tuneful bass.
Tonality: there is nothing to choose between this cable and the GAC-2. They're equally good.
Resolution: again very similar to the Gotham GAC-2, but a wee bit less resolving of low level details.
Soundstage width, depth and separation: well-separated voices in the lateral space but more bunched up than the GAC-2, rendering instruments and voices with lesser lateral separation. Depth is well-behind the speakers, with layering of voices. Probably slightly more adept at handling complexity and loudness than the GAC-2.
Attack and decay: good attack and gentle decay.
Dynamics: handles macro dynamic swings well, but loses out on micro dynamics. But, mind you, if one hadn't heard them one after the other (with the GAC-2), it would not have been possible to make that out.
The GAC-2 has more positives than the RMIC05. They both have their weaknesses and strengths, with the GAC-2 chesting it out to the ribbon for a close and thrilling finish.
The RMIC05 scores 7.5 out of 10 due to its slightly lower resolution and lesser ability to present a more coherent lateral separation. It is relatively more bunched up around the phantom stereo center.
More to follow....
Last edited by a moderator:
And I'm starting with my favourite Robbie Williams' album "I've Been Expecting You"
