Customer Reviews

The tests of the cable took place on two types of system. The first one consisted of a source, a preamplifier, a monophonic final amplifier and relative passive loudspeakers. In this case the cable has been tested on the pre and power amp connection. The second typology foresaw the use of active loudspeakers and therefore the cable has been used on the pre and active loudspeakers connection. The main system was composed by:

• CD/SACD source = Esoteric K01
• HD File Source = Grandinote Volta
• Preamplifier = Grandinote Genesi
• Monophonic Endings = Demon Grandinote
• Passive Speakers = JBL K2 s9800 SE
• Active loudspeakers = Neumann KH 420
• Source Wiring = 1 m Acrolink Mexcel 7N-DA6300 (both CD/SACD and HD file source)
• Passive speaker cabling = Silcable special version made especially for JBL on spec. All on Finite Elemente Pagode Edition table
• Power cables = Forrest "Black" on all electronics
• Socket = Oyaide (with internal modification and full "Silcable" wiring) + Silcable Six

The cables used for testing were:

• Cable 1 = Acrolink Mexcel from 7N-A2500 XLR 2 m
• Cable 2 = Ricable Invictus XLR 3 m
• Cable 3 = Sommer Cable Epilogue XLR 3 m
• Cable 4 = Klotz Titanium XLR 3 m

I must immediately say that the same result has been found in both types, this means that the cable has not been influenced by the connected devices. In total I have rotated, in addition to the Ricable, three other cables very different both for target (two come from the world of "pro" audio) and, above all, for list price. All the cables had the same length of 3 m except for the top one where the very high cost forced me to the measure of 2 m, however enough to make the expected connections.
For the test, I asked three friends of mine who spent a few hours at different times listening to music while the cables were swapped without them knowing which ones were connected. Apart from a generic indication of "cable 1", "cable 2", "cable 3" and "cable 4" nothing was said about brand and cost. Only at the end of the test, leaving connected the cable that had obtained the best liking, they could verify the result. Clearly I didn't influence anyone and, on the contrary, apart the most expensive cable of which they knew the existence since I've been using it for many years, of the other three, Ricable included, they didn't know the characteristics.
The result, which I too was surprised by, was identical on all occasions and confirmed what I had already found in the first week of owning the Invictus.

At this point I have to make an important premise before continuing; cables, as we all know, can behave differently depending on the system they are connected to, because some electronics may, for their characteristics, not agree with the construction philosophies, the materials used and the technical choices applied by the manufacturer. I think that in this case something similar has happened and I hope that nobody feels offended. Anyway, these are always personal feelings, even if shared, that have been detected in "my" listening room (even here we know that the environment can really make big differences).
The differences, in fact, have been there, they have been clear and felt by all the participants who, I must point out, have not been mistreated nor forced to give the final result 🙂 and have been tangible also at a physical level, especially in the low range. This last one, if not well reproduced, becomes easily detectable. Big differences also in the mid range which, in the system used, is very revealing.
Joking aside, now you'll want to know what the verdict was at the end of these tests, which took place for fun and games, but with the aim of understanding some dynamics in the audio world. At the end the less appreciated cable has resulted, to my surprise, I swear, just the Ricable that has given the "poorest" result among the various contenders. The best in terms of absolute performance was the Acrolink 7N-A2500, as it was hoped it would be, but its very high price, more than twelve times the list price of the Ricable cable, put it on such a high level that in the end it is like comparing a Ferrari to a mid-range car... so let's say it is OK.
However, the winner of the test was the Sommer Cable, which has been chosen as the best objective sound because it lost something in precision and bandwidth extremes compared to the Acrolink, but gained in naturalness, musicality, dynamics giving that quid to the musical message making it more natural and zeroing the listening fatigue. The Klotz was a good step below the Acrolink, with less openness and less detail.
The Ricable in all the sessions was excluded almost immediately, in the sense that during the test it was the one that was less precise, with a lower dynamic, making the result much flatter without giving rhythm to the music. Above all in the jazz it was found the flattening of the instruments often making the scene very confused, almost as if it couldn't unravel the sound message. It's as if he had to convey so much information at once, that in the end it was confusing and lacked rhythm. The only positive aspect was the always correct exposure of the soundstage with a very realistic dimensional placement of the various instruments. Even the bass range suffered from this behaviour, being the worst of the three, especially in the deepest bass, which was less present than in the other three cables, almost as if it were "sticky" and with the "brake pulled". The listening experience of the Ricable is pleasant and without listener fatigue. I'm really sorry I couldn't keep it in my set-up, but with the current electronics it doesn't match at all.
However, I would like to thank Ricable and their staff very much for making this beautiful initiative happen. I apologize, but I'm not very good at writing reviews 🙂 .