19-Mar-2020, 02:12
(This post was last modified: 20-Mar-2020, 00:23 by deviousalet.)
I made a major update to my system: upgrading speaker cables from Audioquest Castle Rock to Audioquest Thunderbird Zero/Bass (both 8' bi-wired).
I had read numerous reports of how much better the new Audioquest Zero cables sounded than even more-expensive Audioquest cables from the last generation, and when I was offered a set at more than half off I had to try them. I remembered the improvement the Castle Rock made over some pretty good cables I used previously (Soundlink Red Dragon 11-AWG OFHC copper, Blue Jeans / Belden 10-AWG, and Belden 12-AWG ETP copper) so I had high hopes.
The Castle Rock bi-wire was splitting a 12 AWG cable while the Thunderbird bi-wire is two runs of 10.5 AWG, so if nothing else there's more than double the copper. Both Audioquest cables use the same geometry and almost the same metals (PCS+ except for some LGC in the Thunderbird Bass. The Thunderbird are better shielded and grounded. Anyway, on to listening.
I've used the Castle Rock for years and the Thunderbird were brand new, so I expected the new cables to need some break-in before sounding their best. I'm writing this after maybe 50 hours with the Thunderbirds, but already the differences are worth writing about.
My B&W 804d3 speakers are fairly small and efficient, so I didn't think that I needed bigger wires, but whatever the reason the improvement is in the magnitude of "Wow, I didn't know that my speakers could do that!" The bass is massively improved, both in quantity and quality. I use SAM at 100%, but hadn't ever complained about a lack of bass. In fact I chose the 804d3 because they have the best bass I've heard in a small floor-standing speaker. Now I'm hearing far more texture in bass strings, feeling more impact from drums, and hearing more detail in synthetic drops. The bass is simply remarkable, and totally delightful.
Dynamics are also remarkable, and even though I'm not picky about that aspect of music the difference is amazing between these cables. It is as if someone turned off dynamic-range compression in an AV Receiver. I'm still getting used to it, but think that I'll like it once it quits being surprising. There is also a decrease in noise, or a "blacker background", which only enhances the floor from which the dynamics jump. I was concerned that this "quiet" was smoothing over detail. After all, an easy way to decrease noise is to filter out frequencies at the cost of hearing detail contained in those frequencies (the balance between "smooth" and "detailed". However the decreased noise floor with the Thunderbirds seems to be purely positive.
Initially I thought that some detail was missing, but whether it is break-in or me adjusting, I'm hearing more detail now than with the old cables, even though it is within the context of the fuller frequency response. As always, some apparent detail can be enhanced by emphasizing high frequencies and removing low frequencies. It is like moving from small monitors to full-range speakers: it can seem like detail is missing until one adjusts to the fuller context. The Thunderbird cables add so much bass context that it took me adjusting to that before I started hearing the treble detail. This still may improve with break-in, but even now I'm enjoying hearing more detail at all frequencies. It isn't a huge improvement, but I'm finding more little things to enjoy in my music: a shaker in the background, a light touch of symbols, and some soft sounds becoming clearer as to what instrument or technique they are. For instance, I've attended some house concerts lately where I've been less than 10' from a cellist, so have seen more of how they make some of the percussive sounds. Therefore I'm listening for those details, and hearing more of what I heard in person through the Thunderbirds than I did through the Castle Rock. To be fair, I'm not doing A-B comparisons, just enjoying familiar music in new ways. There's also improvement to sound-staging, less in overall size than in more differentiation between the location of sounds. I don't notice any change in tonality beyond the massively-increased bass.
Overall the Thunderbirds have the same character as the Castle Rock, but are a massive improvement in bass, a shocking increase in dynamics, and a interesting improvement in detail throughout the spectrum. The complete effect is entrancing, and simply amazing how much more a change in cables gets out of my speakers. This is type of change that makes it a delight to go wandering through my collection of music, enjoying each piece anew.
I had read numerous reports of how much better the new Audioquest Zero cables sounded than even more-expensive Audioquest cables from the last generation, and when I was offered a set at more than half off I had to try them. I remembered the improvement the Castle Rock made over some pretty good cables I used previously (Soundlink Red Dragon 11-AWG OFHC copper, Blue Jeans / Belden 10-AWG, and Belden 12-AWG ETP copper) so I had high hopes.
The Castle Rock bi-wire was splitting a 12 AWG cable while the Thunderbird bi-wire is two runs of 10.5 AWG, so if nothing else there's more than double the copper. Both Audioquest cables use the same geometry and almost the same metals (PCS+ except for some LGC in the Thunderbird Bass. The Thunderbird are better shielded and grounded. Anyway, on to listening.
I've used the Castle Rock for years and the Thunderbird were brand new, so I expected the new cables to need some break-in before sounding their best. I'm writing this after maybe 50 hours with the Thunderbirds, but already the differences are worth writing about.
My B&W 804d3 speakers are fairly small and efficient, so I didn't think that I needed bigger wires, but whatever the reason the improvement is in the magnitude of "Wow, I didn't know that my speakers could do that!" The bass is massively improved, both in quantity and quality. I use SAM at 100%, but hadn't ever complained about a lack of bass. In fact I chose the 804d3 because they have the best bass I've heard in a small floor-standing speaker. Now I'm hearing far more texture in bass strings, feeling more impact from drums, and hearing more detail in synthetic drops. The bass is simply remarkable, and totally delightful.
Dynamics are also remarkable, and even though I'm not picky about that aspect of music the difference is amazing between these cables. It is as if someone turned off dynamic-range compression in an AV Receiver. I'm still getting used to it, but think that I'll like it once it quits being surprising. There is also a decrease in noise, or a "blacker background", which only enhances the floor from which the dynamics jump. I was concerned that this "quiet" was smoothing over detail. After all, an easy way to decrease noise is to filter out frequencies at the cost of hearing detail contained in those frequencies (the balance between "smooth" and "detailed". However the decreased noise floor with the Thunderbirds seems to be purely positive.
Initially I thought that some detail was missing, but whether it is break-in or me adjusting, I'm hearing more detail now than with the old cables, even though it is within the context of the fuller frequency response. As always, some apparent detail can be enhanced by emphasizing high frequencies and removing low frequencies. It is like moving from small monitors to full-range speakers: it can seem like detail is missing until one adjusts to the fuller context. The Thunderbird cables add so much bass context that it took me adjusting to that before I started hearing the treble detail. This still may improve with break-in, but even now I'm enjoying hearing more detail at all frequencies. It isn't a huge improvement, but I'm finding more little things to enjoy in my music: a shaker in the background, a light touch of symbols, and some soft sounds becoming clearer as to what instrument or technique they are. For instance, I've attended some house concerts lately where I've been less than 10' from a cellist, so have seen more of how they make some of the percussive sounds. Therefore I'm listening for those details, and hearing more of what I heard in person through the Thunderbirds than I did through the Castle Rock. To be fair, I'm not doing A-B comparisons, just enjoying familiar music in new ways. There's also improvement to sound-staging, less in overall size than in more differentiation between the location of sounds. I don't notice any change in tonality beyond the massively-increased bass.
Overall the Thunderbirds have the same character as the Castle Rock, but are a massive improvement in bass, a shocking increase in dynamics, and a interesting improvement in detail throughout the spectrum. The complete effect is entrancing, and simply amazing how much more a change in cables gets out of my speakers. This is type of change that makes it a delight to go wandering through my collection of music, enjoying each piece anew.
