Grover Huffman SX interconnect - single ended

owenmd · « **on:** 9 Sep 2009, 09:21 pm »

Hi guys.... a brief new cable review FYi.

There appears to be two schools of opinion when it comes to Grover Huffman cables...?

The first is irritation from some customers as Grover continually develops and improves his products and forever seeks the Holy Grail of cable design and construction at "sensible" cost. This obviously means that his existing cable designs are eventually superseded which presents an opportunity to upgrade if one feels a need, and wishes to stay up to date... which can irritate some folk.

The alternative opinion is that at each level of Evolution, Grover always offers great performance and value for money and one would often have to spend many times their cost to realize significant improvement. As each evolutionary level appears, Grover always gracefully offers a path to upgrade for a very reasonable fee.

I guess whichever school you belong to is a matter of perspective.... but I seem to have fallen mostly into the latter camp.... as accepting change is certainly the true nature of Life. Having owned many different interconnect cables over the years varying in price from homemade to around $1000 / pair, I came across the Grover cables a couple of years ago or so. Compared to the five times more expensive cables I was using, the Grover SC's were practically as good, and so I changed to free up some funds. A few months ago, I upgraded to the SCdot interconnects which were a very significant improvement.

A couple of weeks ago, I learned of Grover's latest iteration; the SX's. To be totally honest, I was a touch disheartened as this latest evolutional level had come so quickly, but after talking with Grover, he convinced me to try them, as he believed they were a significant advancement.... I had been very happy with my previous upgrade, so decided to give them a go.

The new SX's have the same family resemblance to the SC's and SCdots, but they are a little larger in diameter, but still very flexible. From the first few notes played, I could tell these cables were quite different to their predecessors. Grover intimated that they start to sound pretty good after only 10 hours, which was true, but I found they became much smoother and more organic sounding past the 30 - 40 hour mark.

"In my system"

Compared to their SCdot predecessors, the SX's have a much bigger and more open sound stage.... the bandwidth feels like it has opened right up with less limitation in both directions. For the same volume, they appear to play louder.... not sure if that's a lower resistance thing going on there...? The foundation of the music is much more substantial with more body and weight, and while it appears there is a touch more bass, it also seems tighter, more extended and better defined than the dots. The SX's are significantly more transparent than the dots as I've heard new information not even present before and there is a much greater sense of sound stage depth and layering. The HF content is enhanced, but at the same time, its much smoother.... particularly on female upper vocals etc. The SX's sound much more natural than the dots and for me, are one of those products that you don't define as more this, or better that.... they just play music and reproduce the event very convincingly.

My only "initial" concern was that the SX's were a touch forward in their presentation compared to the dots, sounding 3 rows back rather than my preferred 10 row seat. However, with more hours (around 80) this presentation seems to be relaxing as I'm not as conscious of it now.... maybe its me that's changed...?

Overall.... I'm extremely happy with the new SX's and very glad I took the Grover offer of the upgrade. These interconnects continue to compete with cables at multiples of their price making these a true bargain IMHO.

I noticed another report of the new SX's on Audio Nervosa's website which I found quite curious as it was completely contrary to my findings...? The only thing I can think of is poor synergy between components or some other kind of mismatch...? The good news is that Grover offers a no questions, 60 day money back return if for some reason they don't work for you, which is invaluable.

Primary components used:

Modwright Transporter
Burson buffer
Vaughn Carina
Hawthorne Stirling Trio's

groverh · « **Reply #1 on:** 12 Sep 2009, 05:06 pm »

I wish to thank owenmd for hearing and posting the improvements I've made to my new Sx RCA cables. I love making cables and listening to music; to me nothing is more enjoyable. For me cable making is a quest, a quest for the Holy Grail as it were, so exciting and fulfilling. I began my involvement in cables over 10 years ago, at the time I knew cables made a difference but I had no idea at the time what a difference. Making music real is the Holy Grail, isn't it? We want a time portal to the original event, to hear it in real time. The closer we get to the event the more fulfilling our experience. Owenmd has captured the essence of the Sx exactly as I hear it.

konut · « **Reply #2 on:** 12 Sep 2009, 09:21 pm »

Welcome to AC Mr. Huffman!

I have read nothing but good things about your cables. I look forward to reading your thoughts regarding what you think are the important considerations involved in selecting interconnects. Of course we wouldn't want you to give away your trade secrets!

How much is a 1 meter pair of SXs?

mdconnelly · « **Reply #3 on:** 12 Sep 2009, 10:41 pm »

Check out all of Grover's cables here: http://www.groverhuffman.com/

groverh · « **Reply #4 on:** 13 Sep 2009, 10:04 pm »

Love AC Mr. (assuming) konut. How did you like my photograph on the title page? That's Mt. Whitney at night.

konut · « **Reply #5 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 12:30 am »

Yes, its mister, but you can call me Ted. That photograph IS quite amazing! Your timing and photographic skills intersected just right. Maybe I missed it, or I'm just dense, but I didn't see any specs regarding impedance, resistance, or inductance. What are your views about these parameters WRT interconnects?

groverh · « **Reply #6 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 06:30 pm »

I actually consider capacitance the most important spec. My RCA line level cables run around 20pf. per ft. Resistance negligible, inductance .15uH per ft. With line cables these spec only become important with very long runs. The sound is the most important spec, that's the hard part.

konut · « **Reply #7 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 09:51 pm »

Thank you for the prompt reply. If you don't mind my asking, what are your views regarding eddy currents WRT line level vs speaker level signals? Many consider it a non-issue for both, but, then again, I have read other opinions, which contain a certain logic, that maintains that speaker level signals WILL be affected but line level will not. Your thoughts?

owenmd · « **Reply #8 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 12:05 am »

Quote from: groverh on 13 Sep 2009, 10:04 pm

Love AC Mr. (assuming) konut. How did you like my photograph on the title page? That's Mt. Whitney at night.

Hi Grover.... funny how even chem-trails over Mt. Whitney can look beautiful with the right lighting conditions...!

As you seem to be into photography, have you considered posting some pictures of your products here as your website doesn't seem to have many detailed pics.... just a suggestion...?

groverh · « **Reply #9 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 04:39 pm »

owenmd those are not chem-trails, but a massive lenticular cloud caused by high wind. That cloud had been over Mt. Whitney all day, winds of 60 miles per hour were blowing. They are amazingly beautiful clouds. With a google search you can see many examples of these clouds. The photo was taken at night with the last light of day reflecting on the cloud and mountain. It's a one-second hand held exposure wide open with the camera pressed against my pack. I was amazed it came out. The camera actually sees better than our eye in such light. I didn't want to increase the camera's digital film speed, as the noise would be intrusive. One thing I particularly like about the image is that the top right with the moon is full night, and the bottom with the cloud and the mountain the last light of day, so it's actually a photo of the boundary between day and night.
You're right I need to update the photos on my website.
Regarding eddy current I haven't found this to be an issue with either line level or speaker cables. When it comes to sound all rules of science are suspended. Purely technical analytical approachs yields only ordinary sound. This is why cable making is really an art not a science IMHO.

konut · « **Reply #10 on:** 16 Sep 2009, 01:59 am »

That was an all time great post! Your understanding of photography is telling, as it emplifies your grasp of the technical requirements required to capture a subject, in visualising what the finished product should look like. You had, in essence, done a manual layering, combining 2 separate exposures in a single image. I can appreciate the intellect required and brought to your cable construction. And while I can understand your views on pure technical analysis, I'm thinking you might have overstated, a bit, your stance on sound. ALL rules of science? Really? From the photo on your site, of the speaker cable, its hard to tell weather both + and - conductors reside within the same sheath. If they do, have you ever tried to use 2 separate cables for the + and -, keeping them apart by at least 2"?

groverh · « **Reply #11 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 06:30 pm »

Konut thank you, I've been taking photos of the mountains for 25 years. Just love mountains. Well maybe I exaggerated a bit, about all rules of science.

I do put positive and negative conductors in the same overall sheath with each in it's own separate sheath. I use carbon and nickel on each conductor sheath to stabilize the electrical signals within this sheath. I like the convenience of the one sheath cable, and think others do as well. Do you use such cables as you describe the positive and negative conductors separated by 2 inches? The speaker cables use rather large conductors and a lot of air. The use of copper, silver, and aluminum yields a Lovely sound.

konut · « **Reply #12 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 10:56 pm »

At the moment I'm using solid core magnet wire, the so called Anticables which are at least 2" apart, usually more. Before that I was using DNM, another solid core cable, although the DNM was a ribbon of plastic with the + and - conductors on the same ribbon spaced evenly by the plastic. Before that I've used all variety of different cables from garden hose size biwire to stranded and such. I must have a least 6 different brands and constructions of speaker cable in my possession now. It may be totally psychological, but it seemed that when I went the separated conductor route, there was a more relaxed sense to the presentation. Sound-stage focused better bringing a precision to individual instruments. Have you ever tried spacing your + and - cables? While I can appreciate the convenience of your present configuration, I'm wondering if there isn't an optimal spacing schema whereas one could space the conductors far enough apart to prevent any induced magnetic fields, yet still have the utility of a single run.

groverh · « **Reply #13 on:** 18 Sep 2009, 03:33 pm »

That's very interesting konut. I do believe that the carbon nickel treatment I give the conductors neutralizes the interacting magnetic fields. But you could be right I'll check it out. Such a cable would impose several logistical problems for consumers. I've found that it's important to keep speaker cables off the floor, so a cable spaced like this would be more difficult to use. Maybe down the line you can hear my speaker cable; it's very open and smooth.

konut · « **Reply #14 on:** 18 Sep 2009, 10:43 pm »

I look forward to your findings if you try the separate conductors. I don't think there are any other cable makers using a carbon nickel configuration. Would that act as a Faraday cage? Its funny you mention keeping the cable off the floor. I had never given it much thought, but since my speaker runs are short, the solid core doesn't have a chance to hit the floor. Would I be correct in assuming a 3ft pair of speaker cables would be $120?

groverh · « **Reply #15 on:** 20 Sep 2009, 04:03 pm »

Yep 3 ft pairs $120. The carbon nickel acts as a passive EMI RFI absorber. It also stabilizes the signals magnetic interaction. The speaker cable is a mixture of copper, silver, and aluminum, in various gauge custom ribbons suspended in air. A completely unique and patented design.

HumanMedia · « **Reply #16 on:** 28 Sep 2009, 03:10 pm »

Great info on the speaker cables. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would love to know more about the latest incarnation of your SX interconnects. Any details on materials and features would be greatly appreciated.

owenmd · « **Reply #17 on:** 2 Oct 2009, 10:46 pm »

The SX interconnects use "similar" materials and construction to the SX speaker cables.... hybrid ribbons made from copper, silver and aluminum using an air dielectric.... novel technology and fabulous performance.... and a steal at the prices Mr. Huffman is currently asking...!

droht · « **Reply #18 on:** 9 Oct 2009, 02:56 pm »

I'm not trying to debate how much cables matter, but I'm trying to understand the orignal post. OP states that

Quote

Compared to the five times more expensive cables I was using, the Grover SC's were practically as good, and so I changed to free up some funds. A few months ago, I upgraded to the SCdot interconnects which were a very significant improvement.

So, SCdot ICs were significant improvement over cables that were almost as good as $1000/pair cables. And now the new version is even better. I can understand subtle changes in sound, especially with highly resolving systems, but I don't get how huge improvements can be gained. It seems that if those kinds of gains are possible then we'd all be constantly changing cables to find nirvana. Given that lots of us don't even know if cables matter much at all it really gets confusing.

I know this seems like I'm trying to pick another cable fight, but I really am not. I'm really just trying to understand what a "significant improvement" is. On a scale of 1 to 100 how do you rate the improvement? How would you rate things like going from TV speakers to an HT set up, or from a clock radio to a nice 2 channel system? Ipod ear buds to real headphones? I ask this because very few changes I have made to my system would rate as "significant" to me. Mostly subtle, though still important to be sure.

shep · « **Reply #19 on:** 9 Oct 2009, 03:10 pm »

My 2 cents for what it's worth: I've had four versions of Grover's interconnects. The latest (SX with aluminum) is far and away the best. I wouldn't know how to rate it except to say it's very much more enjoyable than any version I've had. Yes it's a very good deal. I have no idea how it would fare against it's higher priced brethren. A word of warning is in order. Do not even attempt to evaluate this cable until it has had at least 100 hours on it. I'm speaking from recent experience.