# Quick Review/Comparison. Kimber Select 1010 vs. Cardas Neutral Reference



## stuartr

Hello all, 
 I was just doing a cable comparison, and I figured I would share it with you all. I really enjoyed both of these cables, but it taught me how truly system/component dependent cables are. In any case, you can't really go wrong with either of these cables, but you can certainly do better with them when they are correctly paired. Let me go over the system that I used for comparison. 
 Amp: Conrad-Johnson CAV-50 (integrated) wired for triode operation. Stock tubes except for older black bottom RCA 6SN7's from about the 60s.
 Digital Source: Conrad-Johnson DV2b tubed CD player. 
 Analog Source: Music Hall MMF-9 turntable.
 Phono Preamp: Conrad-Johnson EV-1.
 Speakers: B&W 805 Nautilus on lead/sand filled stands with Kimber 4TC speaker cable.
 Headphone Amp: Melos SHA/Gold. Still all stock (soon to be maestrobated). 
 Headphones: Joe Grado HP-2's with signature cable. 
 Music: I mostly used Kelly Joe Phelps's "Lead Me On" and "Shine-eyed Mister Zen". Both are very well recorded blues with just guitar and voice. Also Mstislav Rostropovich's recording of Bach's 5th cello suite. For analog I used Classic Records 200g 45 rpm test pressing of Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven. I listened to other stuff, but these are what are fresh in my mind. 

 On to the meat....
 When using the cables between my cd player and my amp, I listened to my speakers. When listening to the prelude to the 5th cello suite, I found the Kimber cables to be just a little too dark to be involving. A little muddled as well. The music was excellent, but just not interesting. The Cardas were much better. They let through more detail, and were brighter. The music opened up and was more involving. It sounded more natural. 
 With the Melos/HP-2 and the same music though, the Cardas cables sounded bright and almost grating. Not quite, but almost. The music was extremely detailed, but not really that enjoyable to listen to. The Kimbers however sounded perfect. They added another layer of depth to the music, and made the sound far richer and smoother. The brightness in the upper registers was tamed, and the voices (in the Kelly Joe Phelps) sounded more natural and inviting. Little detail was sacrificed, and that which was was not particularly desirable.

 Using the cables in an analog setup (between the turntable and phono stage), I listened on the 805s to the Led Zepelin. This recording is really a revelation for people who are used to the Led Zepelin on CD. The old versions of Zepelin were horrible, very compressed and just plain awful. This record was pressed directly from the master. It is a totally different experience. I tried the Kimbers first. 
 Everything sounded great to start, but what really threw me was when the drums came in. They sounded just like drums...that may not sound like a revelation, but compared to the cd's, it is. They sounded very real. I also noticed that the soundstage was very good, with sound filling the room horizontally. The voices sounded very natural. It was a nice experience. 
 Switching to the cardas, the first thing that I noticed was the clarity. The voices and flutes were spot on, and the plucked guitar strings were each very distinct. This was also true of the cymbals. I noticed the echoes much more with the cardas, which I think is characteristic of their ability to really get at all the detail in the recording. Overall, the cardas seemed to rock a little more. 

 I think the problem that I had with the cardas and the melos/HP-2's in the cd player may just have been the inadequacies of the digital format. The HP-2s are incredibly revealing phones, when you add the cardas, you are basically getting every last bit of data, including the ones you don't necessarily want. The Kimbers tamed this harshness and really rounded out the phones while maintaining a sense of naturalness and reality. I think the cardas worked better on my speaker setup since I have a pretty warm (but accurate) system (all tubes). When paired with just the melos and HP-2, it was just too much. In any case, I think they are both great cables, and I have put the Cardas between the cd-player and CAV-50 and the Kimbers between the Melos and the CAV-50. So far so good. Now I just need to find two more used pairs of the neutral reference to go between the turntable and the amp....hmm. Christmas. Anyway, I hope this helps anyone considering these cables.


----------



## jude

Wow, man, I've been wanting to read about the experiences of folks who've heard both. The Kimber Select line is a line I've yet to hear outside of the context of a trade show, so this was of great interest to me. Thanks a lot, stuartr.


----------



## stuartr

Glad you liked it. Let me reiterate that both cables are excellent. They are the two best cables I have heard in my system. Considering the 1010's are the bottom of the barrel in the Select line, I would imagine that the better ones could equal or better the cardas...albeit with a very different character. As I said, I think it really depends on the components...


----------



## Dreamslacker

Quote:


 _Originally posted by stuartr _
*Glad you liked it. Let me reiterate that both cables are excellent. They are the two best cables I have heard in my system. Considering the 1010's are the bottom of the barrel in the Select line, I would imagine that the better ones could equal or better the cardas...albeit with a very different character. As I said, I think it really depends on the components... * 
 

I should think so too. I've had the chance to listen to both the KS1020 & KS1030. The KS1030 is more neutral & revealing than the KS1020. 
 I reckon it's due to the KS1030 running 4 pure silver conductors as opposed to the KS1020's 2 silver & 2 copper. =)


----------



## Ebonyks

Your experences with the cardas are very simliar to mine. The only thing i'm unsure about is about the brightness aspect, whether it's just bringing out the brightness in sources, or the cables are just plain bright. What's your personal opinion on the subject?


----------



## stuartr

Brightness might be the wrong word. It was more along the lines of harshness. It was only pronounced when between the cd player and the melos/hp-2's. Since the cd-player is good, and not particularly bright (it is a tubed cd player that is generally warm and relaxed), I think it is the cables. Not that they are bright themselves though, just that they are so resolving that they pick up the digital ickyness in the cd player, and the melos and HP-2's are also so resolving as to pick it up. In the case of the cd player, they are too revealing of a cable; they expose shortcomings in the system/format that were not otherwise there. It would have been interesting if I had a SACD player to see if the same problem was evident on the SACD layer...oh well, unless anyone wants to donate a XA777ES, I will leave it to someone else to verify.


----------



## Ebonyks

hmm, i guess our opinions just differ. On every source i've heard the cardas on, it's been slightly on the bright/harsh side, including my MMF 5, so it seems to not simply be limited to digital sources in my experences. Perhaps my ears are just broken 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I suppose i've got an Ns500v if you want to play around with SACD though 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm really just arguing semantics though. Whether they're bringing out the brightness in sources, or are just plain bright, if it sounds flawed, it's the damned cables


----------



## stuartr

ha, perhaps that's it! It may be the differences in our setup as well...are you running a solid-state setup? Are you speakers/headphones very resolving? If so, perhaps the cardas are just not great in your system....or maybe it's the cables


----------



## Hirsch

When I originally tried the Virtual Dynamics Master Series, I thought it was too bright. I spoke about this with Rick at Virtual Dynamics, and he told me that what I was hearing was my source. In particular, he believes that the mechanical vibration of the transformer creates a static charge that can affect the sound, appearing as brightness. A very revealing cable would disclose this.

 The cure he proposed was to use brass cones under the CD player, making sure that one was located under the transformer. I thought he was nuts. However, I had some Mapleshade Surefeet I was using with speakers, and moved a set under the CD53. The brightness went away, and hasn't been back. Now I think *I'm* nuts. However, I've played this system for other people, and nobody's complained about brightness since I started using the cones. If you've got an otherwise great cable that seems overly bright, particularly coming out of a CD player, it's worth a shot.


----------



## Ebonyks

stu, i use an ety-melos combination, not too different from your own. For tubes, i'm using amperex gold pin tubes.

 Perhaps that would help hirsch. The feet on the MMF 5 do seem pretty flimbsy...


----------



## stuartr

Hmm, that's interesting. The MMF9 has spiked feet, and the cd player has rubber feet...it sounds a little voodoo-ish for me, but perhaps I will try it sometime.


----------



## AC1

Dealing with vibration in components has helped a lot in eliminating the high end harshness that comes with digital. That probably is one area that has seen the most change when dealing with vibration. 
 However there are still isolation devices that can still be "voiced" bright. For instance Aurios are known to give a brighter sound, where in comparison the Stillpoints are considerably warmer. But they all help smooth out the top end irregardless of how they are voiced.


----------



## carlo

Stuart,

 Awesome. I'm currently trying KS-1030 (borrowed from a Head-Fier currently trying my Neutral Reference). To me, the Neutral Reference sounds darker up top and glossier with female vocals, and doesn't sound as clean, linear, or unobtrusive as the Kimber.

 The Cardas doesn't lose detail, but there's a little extra that I don't get from other cables: I think its arguable that the Cardas lets more through than the rest, but I still think its a coloration. Female vocals and trumpets sound too round, if that makes sense, and its only apparent with the rest the cable does so well. The Kimber has all the detail without accentuation.

 We have similar set-ups, and I know we have similar tastes for music reproduction 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, so I think you assumption about the Select series is accurate. Its interesting that the 1010 sounds dark when compared to the Neutral Reference in your rig (and your ears), and the Neutral Reference sounds dark when compared to the 1030 in my rig (with my ears). 

 When kelly was trying cables he said he suspected manufacturers flavored them on purpose, so the unflavored cables could cost much more. I'm still skeptical, but sometimes...

 What do you think?


----------



## Stoney

When testing cables, methodology is problematic in a few ways. 

 Make sure not to move the cables around much, and then let them settle in for, say, 24 hours of signal applied before listening critically. There is definitely a break-in effect, even when simply moving around a cable (which can create triboelectric and even piezoelectric charges that can affect propagation until the charges even out and are somewhat dissipated.) I've heard the result of moving cabled and it can cause differences that are startling, even larger than differences among cable brands! 

Cardas - cable break in
Cardas - cable and connector longevity
Demonstrations of triboelectric charging exhibited by everyday objects
The Triboelectric Series of Materials Causing Static Electricity - Succeed in Physical Science
triboelectric noise defined
Minnisota wire & cable, triboelectric noise

 What this means is that you are much better off doing long-term listening rather than a-b comparisons. Cable settling may be a contributing reason why many people feel long-term listening is more successful in revealing differences (and whether they are improvements or just differences) than short-term testing. 

 Actually, that is another key issue: differences that are heard need to be further assessed to find whether they are improvements or just differences. You know what I mean, at least, when a difference is clearly an improvement? One can hear things "coming together" and "making sense" that wasn't present before? For example an odd sound reveals itself to be a reverberation; a choice in mixing the record reveals itself to be an appropriate artistic choice and not just some random thing. 

 This is tough, especially if the system isn't totally neutral and revealing (and whose is?). I find that speakers can be much than headphones, in that headphones have many colorations (including the pinnae-related filtration issues, and hearing canal resonance differences, perhaps, not to mention intermodulation distortion). Speakers that are excellent at imaging are like magnifying glasses for differences in comparison tests, because the image is very easily altered or damaged by tiny differences. Treble might move forward, or images may become vague, or textures may appear to change slightly. If your attention is slightly drawn to a different part of the instrumental sound, this can be a tip of something subtle but real. These aren't likely to appear in headphones at such small amounts. 

 Lastly, one can do bypass tests on line stages and cables. A good quality passive preamp (and experience with using it in bypass mode) helps a lot in doing bypass tests of cables and even other passive line stages. The methodology is still a bit tricky. Try using a tape loop for cable bypass tests... but, you need to make sure the connectors and switches and wiring don't alter the sound much. (I tested a couple of ARC SP-9 units in 1989 that had horrible sound changes just from adding passive components to the signal path... a truly bad sounding unit that was probably ruined in part from passive parts). Even the leads on components (like silver-coated leads on the new  DynamiCaps) can alter the sound badly. 

 With a passive preamp, you will avoid changes due to output buffer stages. You can test cables in short and long lengths, switching a cable in and out using a switch, and thus not jostling the cable which can alter its sound for up to a day or two. 

 If the sound is the same in both short and long lengths, you have an excellent cable. If the sound is essentially the same in and out, this is also likely to be an excellent cable (but again be careful that the preamp components are not causing the difference). If there is added brightness, or a change in the location of images, or simply a change in the part of the instrumental timbre which draws your attention most, this can reveal valid differences. 

 These kind of methodology issues can result in conflicting results if not attended to. Could be why people disagree on the sound of a given cable. 

 I find the Cardas Neutral Reference to be just that, very neutral. Cross tends to the warm, and older Hexlink interconnect had a robust bass and hard edge in the treble. 

 Many recent cable brands do not sound neutral at all, and when people get used to them, they judge other cables or products wrongly. Silver cables, small solid-core cables, and flat cables tend to sound bright, so any comparison is thrown off. (See George Cardas' comments near the bottom of Jude's review of Cardas Neutral Reference Interconnects, which would explain what I've detected in listening tests).

 Break-in is also a big problem in headphones themselves. Have you noticed that nobody seems to agree on which Grados are best, and by how much? This is becasue the differences between models are small, but break-in issues relatively large, plus unit-to-unit variations (which are large in general with headphones, and very large among Grados). I suppose this suggests that it might be best to buy used Grados that you can listen to first, and which are already broken in.


----------



## babykenny

Quote:


 _Originally posted by jude _
*Wow, man, I've been wanting to read about the experiences of folks who've heard both. The Kimber Select line is a line I've yet to hear outside of the context of a trade show, so this was of great interest to me. Thanks a lot, stuartr. * 
 

 I'm in the middle of a cable hunt. So far I've listened to Synergistic Research Looking Glass, and Kaleidescope Phase 2, Cardas Neutral Reference, and Golden Reference, Kimber Select KS-1011, and KS-1030. I also have a KS-1021 on the way. When I get that and some time on it I'll Let you know what I think. So far I've kept both Kimber Selects. Ken


----------



## 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...).


----------

