Review #16 - Balanced Cable Invictus XLR - Try a Ricable

The cable tests were conducted on two types of systems. The first 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 active speakers, so the cable was used on the pre and active speaker connection. The main system consisted of:

• CD/SACD Source = Esoteric K01
• HD file source = Grandinote Volta
• Preamplifier = Grandinote Genesis
• Monophonic Endings = Grandinote Demon
• Passive Speakers = JBL K2 s9800 SE
• Active Speakers = 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 specifications. All on Finite Elemente Pagode Edition table.
• Power cables = Forrest "Black" on all electronics
• Power strip = Oyaide (with internal modification and full "Silcable" wiring ) + Silcable Six

The cables used for the test were:

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

I must say right away that the same result was found in both types, which means that the cable was not affected by the connected equipment. In total I rotated, in addition to Ricable, three other cables that were very different both in terms of target audience (two come from the "pro" audio world) and, above all, in terms of list cost. All the cables had the same length of 3 m except for the top one where precisely the very high cost forced me to the size of 2 m, however sufficient to make the planned connections.
For the test I enlisted the help of three of my friends who at different times spent a few hours listening to music while the cables were swapped without them knowing which were connected. Apart from a generic indication of "cable 1," "cable 2," "cable 3," and "cable 4" nothing was said about brand and cost. It was only at the end of the test, leaving the cable that had gotten the best rating connected, that they could verify the result for themselves. Clearly I did not influence anyone and, indeed, apart from the most expensive cable of which they knew the existence since I have been using it for many years, of the other three, including Ricable , they did not know the characteristics.
The result, of which I too was surprised, was identical on all occasions and confirmed what I had already found in the first week of owningInvictus.

At this point I must make an important premise before continuing; cables, as we all know, can behave differently depending on the system to which they are connected, because some electronics may, by their characteristics, not get along with the construction philosophies, materials used and technical choices applied by the manufacturer. I think something similar happened in this case, and I hope no one is offended. However, these are still personal, though shared, feelings that were detected in "my" listening room (again, we know that the environment can really make big differences).
The differences in fact were there, they were sharp and felt by all participants who, I would like to point out, were neither mistreated nor forcibly forced to give the final result 🙂 and they were also tangible at the physical level especially in the low range. The latter, if not well reproduced, becomes easily detectable. Big differences also in the midrange which, in the system used, is very revealing.
All joking aside, you will now want to know what the verdict was at the end of these tests, which took place under the banner of play and pure fun, but for the purpose of understanding some dynamics in the audio world. In the end the least liked cable turned out to be, to my surprise, I swear, the very Ricable that gave the "poorest" result among the various contenders. The best as absolute performance turned out to be the Acrolink 7N-A2500, as it was hoped it would be, however its very high price, we are talking about more than twelve times the list cost of the one Ricable, put it on such a really high level that in the end it is like comparing a Ferrari next to a mid-size... so let's say it fits.
But what came out in the end as the absolute winner of the test, and this was the big surprise, was the Sommer Cable, which was chosen as the best objective sound because it certainly lost something in precision and bandwidth extremes, compared to the Acrolink, but it gained in naturalness, musicality, dynamics giving that quid to the musical message such as to make it more natural and in fact zeroing listening fatigue. A good span below was the Klotz, which presented less openness of the scene and less precision of detail.
The Ricable in all sessions was ruled out almost immediately, in the sense that during the test it was the one that was the least precise, with lower dynamics, making the result much flatter without giving rhythm to the music. Especially in jazz there was a flattening of the instruments often making the scene very confused, almost failing to unravel the sound message. It's as if it had to convey so much information at once, that in the end the whole thing was confusing and lacked rhythm. The only positive aspect was the always correct exposure of the sound scene with very realistic dimensional placement of the various instruments. The bass range also suffered from this behavior, turning out to be the worst of the three especially in the deeper bass, which was less present than in the other three cables almost as if it were "sticky" and with the "brake pulled." A listening experience, that of Ricable, however pleasant in itself and without listener fatigue. I really regret not being able to keep it in my set-up, however, with the current electronics it just does not match.
However, I sincerely thank Ricable and its staff for making this beautiful initiative. I apologize, but I am not very good at writing reviews 🙂 🙂