[gme109]

I know cables are all system dependent, but is there a general consensus between these two speaker cables? Is one clearly better than the other, or one more suitable for certain systems or type of sound?

Thanks

[TomS]

MarkR7 has a lot experience with both in his system so you might ask him.

I have both Reality IC's and speaker cables that have been replacing Cardas Golden Reference in my system.  I have tried them with several combinations of electronics and speakers with great results in most cases.  One caution is not to "mix and match" them with others if possible, though they work fine with the Cardas I have.  They also seem to need about a week of break-in to smooth them out, which isn't too bad compared to some.  Other than that, highly recommended.

Tom

[95bcwh]

GENERAL CONSENSUS??!!??!?

I think you should trust your own ear.

I know cables are all system dependent, but is there a general consensus between these two speaker cables? Is one clearly better than the other, or one more suitable for certain systems or type of sound?

Thanks

[woodsyi]

GENERAL CONSENSUS??!!??!?

The consensus is that anti-cable is cheaper.  So cheap that the interested should just try them and listen for themselves.  Really.
IMHO, anti-cable is a bargain that truly is worth at least 4.765 times it's cost but not any more than 7.345 it's cost. 

[toobluvr]

I own both and switch back and forth between them in my bedroom system:

Signature Technologies SRd23 tubed cdp  >>  Blue Circle BC-24 amp >>  DeVore Gibbons 3 monitors

To be sure, this is a modest system, but don't be fooled.  While quite musical, the Gibbons are also quite capable in the areas of detail and resolution.  Overall, the system is sufficiently transparent such that changes made along the way are quite easily heard.

Just this morning I took out the Speltz and inserted the Straley.

I could easily live with either.  Both are balanced, detailed, liquid and natural in their presentation.  Neither are bright nor tipped up....a major annoyance to me.   Both have nice harmonics and tonal colors.  But pushed to choose, I think I prefer the Reality cables.  Ergonomically, they are just easier to use.  Both are really excellent sonically, but in my setup, the Reality cables are just a bit more fluid and natually detailed, and possess that hard-to-define neuance, palpability and texture that make reproduced music a wee bit more "real" and a touch more involving.

It goes without saying that both are screaming good values.
In my view, you can't go wrong with either!     

[unityaudio.ca]

GENERAL CONSENSUS??!!??!?

I think you should trust your own ear.

I know cables are all system dependent, but is there a general consensus between these two speaker cables? Is one clearly better than the other, or one more suitable for certain systems or type of sound?

Thanks

DITTO! 

[gme109]

GENERAL CONSENSUS??!!??!?

I think you should trust your own ear.

I know cables are all system dependent, but is there a general consensus between these two speaker cables? Is one clearly better than the other, or one more suitable for certain systems or type of sound?

Thanks

In the end, yes you must trust your own ear. The thing is, I don't have all the time in the world, to be trying every friging cable on the planet. I've heard a lot of good things about both of these cables, and I'm just trying to narrow things down.

[gme109]

I own both and switch back and forth between them in my bedroom system:

Signature Technologies SRd23 tubed cdp  >>  Blue Circle BC-24 amp >>  DeVore Gibbons 3 monitors

To be sure, this is a modest system, but don't be fooled.  While quite musical, the Gibbons are also quite capable in the areas of detail and resolution.  Overall, the system is sufficiently transparent such that changes made along the way are quite easily heard.

Just this morning I took out the Speltz and inserted the Straley.

I could easily live with either.  Both are balanced, detailed, liquid and natural in their presentation.  Neither are bright nor tipped up....a major annoyance to me.   Both have nice harmonics and tonal colors.  But pushed to choose, I think I prefer the Reality cables.  Ergonomically, they are just easier to use.  Both are really excellent sonically, but in my setup, the Reality cables are just a bit more fluid and natually detailed, and possess that hard-to-define neuance, palpability and texture that make reproduced music a wee bit more "real" and a touch more involving.

It goes without saying that both are screaming good values.
In my view, you can't go wrong with either!     

Thanks, that's the kind of useful feedback I was looking for.

[Carlman]

I've heard and/or compared them on a couple of systems and they had consistent (to a a small degree) differences I noted.
The anti-cables had a bit more congestion in the upper mids than the Straley's. 
The anti-cables don't seem as balanced from top to bottom as the Straleys... The Anti's seem to overpresent bass a little, under present midbass, etc.
The Anti's seemed a little 'faster' or 'immediate' somehow than the Reality's...

These differences were heard, noted, but weren't 'huge' deviations... I'd say 2-5% changes.  The Reality Cables sound best to me at their price.  I've heard a lot of cables and the RC's really do it for me. 

You'll need to see for yourself.  Anti's sound great to some... and again, for THEIR price, they beat a lot of stuff. 

-C

[gme109]

I've heard and/or compared them on a couple of systems and they had consistent (to a a small degree) differences I noted.
The anti-cables had a bit more congestion in the upper mids than the Straley's. 
The anti-cables don't seem as balanced from top to bottom as the Straleys... The Anti's seem to overpresent bass a little, under present midbass, etc.
The Anti's seemed a little 'faster' or 'immediate' somehow than the Reality's...

These differences were heard, noted, but weren't 'huge' deviations... I'd say 2-5% changes.  The Reality Cables sound best to me at their price.  I've heard a lot of cables and the RC's really do it for me. 

You'll need to see for yourself.  Anti's sound great to some... and again, for THEIR price, they beat a lot of stuff. 

-C

Thanks for the great feedback. What other cables have you compared the Reality's to?

[maxwalrath]

For what it's worth, in direct comparison I preferred Bolder m-80's to Anti-cables, I thought the bass was deeper and tighter.  There's a thread somewhere in AC with some details.

[gooberdude]

Hey guys,

Specifically which type of Reality IC's are you using?    i use speltz cables but
am always interested in good/reasonable priced designs...

do they really have tube and ss versions of the cables?

and what plugs do you all use?  according the Reality's FAQ sheet, they have proprietary plugs.


The Oxygen free copper Reality IC's are 2.25x the price of basic anti-IC's.



i really like speltz's stuff, but when the anti-IC's are stuck together like 2 warring Slinky's i'm much more open to trying something new....

[denjo]

I have not tried the Anti-cables but nevertheless thought that my experiences with a few cables (Audio Note AN-Vx, Neotech copper and silver, Kimber KC-1 and PBJ, Grover UR8, Acoustic Zen Matrix, Zu Varial, against Gregg's Reality might interest you. In my system and setup, the Reality cables sounded the best - good balance between highs and lows, neutral, simply lets the music flow quite effortlessly!The Vampire RCA connectors are also well constructed and fit snugly. And the colour - I love it! I cannot emphasise more that cables are very system dependant and in my case, I seem to have found the right synergy!  

[Carlman]

Thanks for the great feedback. What other cables have you compared the Reality's to?

There are too many to list.  The most recent side-by-side/all things equal comparison I did was the Reality Cables to Audience Au24 and unfortunately, they lost in overall detail and lifelike reproduction.  The Au's are over a thousand used so I felt Ok about the defeat... and it was only a slight difference, not huge in my opinion.  The details were presented more effortlessly and without any harshness at all on the Au's... whereas the RC's had a touch... that's the main difference I heard.

Of others I've tried, I haven't compared them 'scientifically' nor recently enough to give specific pros/cons like I can on the Au24's or the anti-cables.  I would put the RC's in the top of the heap for value, though.  It has taken a cable costing 5x as much to best it by roughly 2%.  The Au's are good value in their price-range as well.  When you get to that level, every fraction of improvement adds a grand to the cost, though.

My recollections of these comparisons have mostly been of the speaker cable differences.  The RC's are the best SC I've heard below 1,k.  The IC's are great and also a good value.  And most of my comparisons had the RC IC's in the chain.  However, some were not... Here again, Au24 would be a strong contender against the RC's.  The VenHaus Pulsars and SilverFi are worthy contenders in this price range also.

-C

[DSK]

Carlman, very interesting. I've read comments from a few peopple who have replaced their Au24 with Anti-cables and a few others who have replaced their Au24 with Reality Cables. This is the first comment I've seen that suggests the Au24 is better.

As always, different ears, tastes and systems I guess.

[95bcwh]

Does it surprise you even more if I tell you that the Reality Cables doesn't sound as good as Audioquest CV-8 in my system?

Carlman, very interesting. I've read comments from a few peopple who have replaced their Au24 with Anti-cables and a few others who have replaced their Au24 with Reality Cables. This is the first comment I've seen that suggests the Au24 is better.

As always, different ears, tastes and systems I guess.

[DSK]

Does it surprise you even more if I tell you that the Reality Cables doesn't sound as good as Audioquest CV-8 in my system?

Carlman, very interesting. I've read comments from a few peopple who have replaced their Au24 with Anti-cables and a few others who have replaced their Au24 with Reality Cables. This is the first comment I've seen that suggests the Au24 is better.

As always, different ears, tastes and systems I guess.

Not at all ... care to mention the areas in which you feel the AQ's are better?

[Carlman]

Carlman, very interesting. I've read comments from a few peopple who have replaced their Au24 with Anti-cables and a few others who have replaced their Au24 with Reality Cables. This is the first comment I've seen that suggests the Au24 is better.

As always, different ears, tastes and systems I guess.

Using McIntosh electronics on Piega speakers in 2 reference systems with good room treatment, the Audience is a little, and I mean only a 'touch' smoother to me in the upper mids.  With this small and specific difference, I wouldn't be surprised if something worked better/different in other systems.  The RC SC's are excellent and have very little of their own character.  The Anti's are great too... but not in the same league as the RC's or Au's... so if someone replaced Au's with anti's I'd think they had some midrange suckout in their room, or their speakers lacked a little impact in the mids, the anti's probably corrected that...

Then there's always ears, music tastes, listening preferences, etc...    I've stopped writing reviews because I don't know what people will really gain from them.  I want to make a change now but I won't until I hear it, side by side, in my system, compared to the original... which sounds very impressive at the moment.  If I say preamp x sounded better to me than preamp y, what does that tell anyone?

-C