Customer Reviews

The cable tests were carried out on two types of system. The first one consisted of source, preamplifier, monophonic power amplifiers and related passive speakers. In this case the cable was tested on the pre and power amp connection. The second type involved the use of active speakers and so the cable was used on the pre and active speakers connection. The main system was composed of:

• CD/SACD source = Esoteric K01
• HD file source = Grandinote Volta
• Preamplifier = Grandinote Genesis
• Monophonic Finals = Grandinote Demon
• Passive speakers = JBL K2 s9800 SE
• Active diffusers = Neumann KH 420
• Source Wiring = 1 m Acrolink Mexcel 7N-DA6300 (both CD/SACD and HD file source)
• Passive Speaker Wiring = Silcable special version specially made for JBL to specification. All on a Finite Elemente Pagode Edition coffee table
• Power cables = Forrest "Black" on all electronics
• Slipper = Oyaide (with internal modification and full "Silcable" wiring) + Silcable Six

The cables used for the test were:

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

I must say from the start that the same result was found in both types, this means that the cable was not affected by the connected devices. In total, three other cables are rotated, in addition to the Ricableother three very different cables both for target (two are derived from the "pro" audio world) and, above all, for price list cost. All the cables had the same length of 3 m except for the top cable where the very high cost forced me to measure 2 m, in any case enough to make the required connections.

For the rehearsal I asked for the intervention of three friends of mine who at different times spent some hours listening to music while the cables were swapped without knowing which ones were connected. Apart from a general 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 the cable that had obtained the best rating connected, could they verify the result in person. Clearly I did not influence anyone and, on the contrary, apart from the most expensive cable of which they knew its existence since I have been using it for many years, the other three, Ricable including, did not know its characteristics.

The result, of which I too was astonished, was identical on all occasions and confirmed what I had already found in the first week of possession of the Invictus.

At this point I have to make an important premise before continuing; cables, as we well know, can behave differently depending on the system to which they are connected, because some electronics could, for their characteristics, not agree with the construction philosophies, the materials used and the technical choices applied by the manufacturer. I believe that in this case something similar has happened and I hope that nobody feels offended. However, it is 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 there have been, have been clear and felt by all the participants who, I would like to point out, were neither mistreated nor forced by force to give the final result 🙂 and have been tangible even at a physical level especially in the low range. The latter, if not well reproduced, becomes easily identifiable. Big differences also in the mid range which, in the system used, is very revealing.

Joking aside, now you will want to know what was the verdict at the end of these tests that were held in the name of the game and pure fun, but in order to understand some dynamics in the world of audio. In the end, the less welcome cable was, to my surprise, I swear, the Ricable "poorer" result among the various contenders. The best absolute performance was the Acrolink 7N-A2500, as it should have been, but its very high price, we are talking about more than twelve times the list price of the RicableAcrolink 7N-A2500, puts it at such a high level that in the end it is like comparing a Ferrari close to a medium displacement... so let's say it fits.

But the one that was the absolute winner of the test, and this was the big surprise, is the Sommer Cable, which was chosen as the best objective sound because it certainly lost something in precision and band extremes, compared to Acrolink, but it gained in naturalness, musicality, dynamics, giving that quid to the musical message that makes it more natural and zero listening fatigue. A good span underneath was the Klotz, which had less openness of the scene and less precision of details.

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 lower dynamics, making the result much flatter without giving rhythm to the music. Especially in jazz it was found the flattening of the instruments, often making the scene very confused, almost unable to unravel the sound message. It's as if it had to transmit so much information at once, that in the end it was confused and devoid of rhythm. The only positive aspect was the always correct exposure of the sound scene with a very realistic dimensional placement of the various instruments. The bass range also suffered from this behaviour, being the worst of the three, especially in the deeper bass, which was less present than in the other three cables as if it were "sticky" and with the "brake pulled". A listening, that of the bassRicable, in itself pleasant and without fatigue on the part of the listener. I'm really sorry I couldn't keep it in my set-up, but with the current electronics it doesn't really match.

However, I would like to thank you Ricable and your staff for this wonderful initiative. I apologize, but I'm not very good at writing reviews 🙂