Super Lumina Speaker Cable. More HiFi Less Music?
Posted by: Steve J on 03 February 2016
I've had the SL speaker cables in my system for seven months now and started to become rather bored with the SQ of my system. I thought it might be due to the fact the system was overdue a rebuild. This I did and, whilst it improved the sound, the pace and attack that I've always loved in my system, particularly on the vinyl side, was still missing. I replaced the SL cables with the old NACA5 and the PRaT was back in spades with a return of the goosebumps.
Change in resolution? Yes there is a slight midrange 'hash' compared with the SL but this is more than compensated for by the increase in 'musicality'. My system rocks again. After nearly three weeks with the NACA5 I am still like a kid with a toy he can't put down. This is how it should be.
I appreciate that the SL speaker cables work for some and the improved resolution does work better in my system with a digital source but there is still a loss of pace and timing. I don't listen to classical music much and the cable probably sounds better with this and other acoustic music but with the rock, jazz and other more rhythmic music I listen to the SL cables don't work for me.
With the LP12 I found the deterioration in SQ more profound with a lack of balance to the music as well the PRaT issues. This may explain why Naim have had problems developing a 4-5 pin SL IC for the Superline.
I have found the SL IC does it's job on the digital side and sounds excellent with the NACA5.
As Naim used to say about fancy expensive cables "more HiFi and less music", this I've found with the SL speaker cables .
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by gary yeowell
My conclusion too after trying SL speaker cables, was very happy returning to NacA5. Not tried the SL interconnect, but i have recently replaced my Hiline with the Lavender for the same reason.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by heihei
I had the same experience with the Telurium Black cable I demod. More resolution and detail but lacked musicality. Went back to NACA 5.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
Hmmm... potentially, this thread could save me at least £8.4K ! 
but i am aware there are many variables in this great hobby of ours...
enjoy...
ken
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Harry
It's going to be different for everyone. I prefer the SL speaker cable to NACA5. It serves to reinforce that the ears of the beholder are golden and audition is paramount. I wonder if the SL is possibly going through a another wobbly phase before opening up. They are buggers to run in but you'd have thought after seven months.......
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Five months here with the SL speaker cables on (ahem) long-term loan. Similar experience to Steve's. I've tried going back to NAC A5 but the upper midrange hash puts me off it. I've reverted to the BIS Audio Vivat cables which clean up the midrange and treble nicely, and the bass, come to think of it, with no loss of musical engagement as compared to NAC A5. Observations apply across all musical genres.
Similar experience with the SL DIN to XLR between the 252 and the 250. The stock cable stays.
The SL source to preamp interconnect on the other hand continues to amaze and delight, whether from the CDX or the nDAC into the SuperNait2, and is the star of the SL lineup.
All three cables change the perception of timing. The additive effect can be too much. Try Leonard Cohen's Amen from his Old Ideas album, using the SL source to pre and the SL speaker cables. The song goes on f o r e v e r.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by hungryhalibut
Hmmm... potentially, this thread could save me at least £8.4K ! but i am aware there are many variables in this great hobby of ours...
enjoy...
ken
If enough people get fed up and sell them, you'll be able to pick some up for a lot less than £8.4k....
Upgrades can be funny things - you get something new and appreciate what it does, then you get used to the new level of performance. You then change something else, even just back to what you had before, and you can think 'ah, that's better' when in fact it's just different.
The main thing I noticed with SL cables is the way the music has become detached from the speakers, so that it lives in the room in a way that it didn't with the A5. Most of my music these days is jazz and chamber music, where the effect is very obvious. But when I do play very rhythmic rock or electronic music, the system still boogies like a bastard. With the SL it's massively more engaging, and I certainly wouldn't go back to A5.
Clearly there is a lot of personal preference at play, and possibly system synergy too. One interesting thing is that the £30 a metre A5 is clearly still a real competitor for the £300 a metre SL.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by nigelb
Very interesting.
I 'auditioned' the SL speaker cables long and hard in my system and swapped between them and NACA5 several times. The clear difference to me at the time was a degree of thickening I would describe it as (the OP describes this as midrange hash), which I never knew was present with the NACA5, but was (almost) entirely removed by the SL speaker cables. I heard this several times each time I swapped the cables over. One thing I didn't notice however was a reduction in PRaT with the SL speaker cables. Overall I had a clear preference for the SL cables. I didn't want to like them because of their huge cost, but I did.
It just goes to show how these these things can manifest themselves in different systems, how our preferences vary and how our ears and brains vary in how they interpret the sounds we hear. That is what makes this hobby so interesting. NOTHING is a given.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by tonym
More reasons, if they were needed, why you've really got to trust your own ears, and listen at length in your own system. Whilst I accept cables have to run in, I cannot accept that they might sound lousy for a couple of months before becoming acceptable. In my experience cables will sound promising from day one.
I tried the SL phono-DIN interconnect in my system & persisted for a fair while, but it really did not work. The music disappeared and it was a relief to go back to the Super Sarum. Seems to me whatever I do to my system nowadays (and I've tried some interesting stuff recently) I somehow always prefer what I've currently got, so I'm getting loathe to mess about any more.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Graham Clarke
My system is digital only (NDS) and I tend to listen to rock, pop and electronic music (zero classical). No way would I want to go back to NAC A5 or Hi Lines.
Of course this is subjective, so doesn't invalidate anyone else's findings. Just posted here for some balance
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
i wonder to what extent the SL speaker cables performance depend on the speakers in use? i wouldnt have thought so though, given non-Naim speaker owners apparently happy with these speaker wires.
"Musicality" is something that has endeared me to Naim Audio since year dot. "That which makes you want to play your system... that which makes you hum a tune well after its finished playing ... that which makes a tune linger in you head... that which makes you want to hug your speakers" ... (OK OK i am getting carried away a bit!!!)
i would therefore be very surprised, shocked even, that a key Naim component is found wanting in the musicality area...
this is a useful warning for me Steve -- after saving for the SL speaker wire i was just going to punt for it without trial -- on 'faith'... perhaps i should plan for a long term demo?
and so, does that mean, if ever i did try SL speaker cable -- i would to run them in past 7 months to get over any musicality wobbles?? Hmmm... Not sure retailers would entertain this. Something doesnt compute here...
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by BigH47
Thanks Steve. Yippee I've saved thousands, wait a minute I wasn't going to spend it anyway.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Foot tapper
That Steve J must be a heretic.
"Stone him", I say, "stone him."
Best regards from a NACA5 user...
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
Hmmm... potentially, this thread could save me at least £8.4K ! but i am aware there are many variables in this great hobby of ours...
enjoy...
ken
If enough people get fed up and sell them, you'll be able to pick some up for a lot less than £8.4k....
.....
Clearly there is a lot of personal preference at play, and possibly system synergy too. One interesting thing is that the £30 a metre A5 is clearly still a real competitor for the £300 a metre SL.
good point Nigel! although i wouldnt buy the SL wire because it was cheap -- performance is key for me -- but i realise you said this in jest anyhow...
interesting point about A5 being still competitive. yes i agree wholeheartedy! we have been using this cable for decades an shied away from deploying other exotic cables. this really hits home how good the A5 has been, and remains...
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
Very interesting.
I 'auditioned' the SL speaker cables long and hard in my system and swapped between them and NACA5 several times. The clear difference to me at the time was a degree of thickening I would describe it as (the OP describes this as midrange hash), which I never knew was present with the NACA5, but was (almost) entirely removed by the SL speaker cables. I heard this several times each time I swapped the cables over. One thing I didn't notice however was a reduction in PRaT with the SL speaker cables. Overall I had a clear preference for the SL cables. I didn't want to like them because of their huge cost, but I did.
It just goes to show how these these things can manifest themselves in different systems, how our preferences vary and how our ears and brains vary in how they interpret the sounds we hear. That is what makes this hobby so interesting. NOTHING is a given.
as a matter of interest nidelb, what speakers do you use with SL wire? -- doesnt say in your profile...
beginning to wonder whether there may be some axtra 'tuning' required for SL wire epending on speaker? Ho hum...
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by jon h
I have said this before. SL spanks NACA5 in every single area except musical timing in my experience.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by TOBYJUG
Couldn't some dealers loan something like this Nordost Vidar burn in and conditioning device ? Supposed to work with all cable types except the almighty Din, and other brands.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by dayjay
You can buy TQ cables already burned in from some suppliers - given the pain in the backside it is to settle down I wish I had done so
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
I have said this before. SL spanks NACA5 in every single area except musical timing in my experience.
but not everyone shares that assessment Jon? but of course this is somewhat obvious since you say: "in my experience"
do you not think this could be speaker/system depenent also? it would be very strange to me for a Naim component to fail on 'timing'!!!
i dont have them at home, so right now, i have no opinion-- but i'm kind of very curious now...
enjoy
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by tonym
Given the price, It really would make sense for Naim via their dealers to make available a set of run-in cables for home trial. Folks need to hang onto their old cabling so they can go back to it for comparison after a period.
Cynical old me gets the feeling some of this "running in" is more to do with people gradually accepting the cable's shortcomings than a change in its structure.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by ken c
Given the price, It really would make sense for Naim via their dealers to make available a set of run-in cables for home trial. Folks need to hang onto their old cabling so they can go back to it for comparison after a period.
Cynical old me gets the feeling some of this "running in" is more to do with people gradually accepting the cable's shortcomings than a change in its structure.
yes, already 'run-in' demo cables make a sense to me...
but Tony, you do accept that 'run-in' exists as a phenomenon in other components, right?
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Hook
Hi Doc - you've reached a very interesting conclusion, and it appears you are not alone.
I've not tried any SL cables beyond the DIN5 used to connect my NDS and 552. To my ears, it was a clear step beyond the HiLine and the Lavender interconnects that proceeded it. I thought about trying the SL speaker cables next, but I eventually decided that everything sounded fine as is (i.e., using standard cables including NACA5), and so I could not justify any more tinkering at this time.
Also, I think we use terms like "timing" and "musicality" to describe a sound that hangs together, and can be listened to "as a whole". IME, when the sound is overly detailed ("etched" or "clinical"), it is harder to see the forest for the trees. I can perhaps hear the piano player's cough or grunt more clearly, but for me, that rarely adds any musical enjoyment. Instead, I've tried to listen for a certain "rightness" of sound - a blend of low, middle and high frequencies that are in proper proportion, and that start, decay and stop as well as an individual recording's quality will allow. In this way, I find I can equally enjoy modern studio as well as historical live recordings in equal measure.
ATB.
Hook
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by tonym
Given the price, It really would make sense for Naim via their dealers to make available a set of run-in cables for home trial. Folks need to hang onto their old cabling so they can go back to it for comparison after a period.
Cynical old me gets the feeling some of this "running in" is more to do with people gradually accepting the cable's shortcomings than a change in its structure.
yes, already 'run-in' demo cables make a sense to me...
but Tony, you do accept that 'run-in' exists as a phenomenon in other components, right?
enjoy
ken
Of course Ken, but running in isn't just a matter of the components! It's so easy to be captivated by a more detailed, clearer sound but IME this comes with downsides too, which we tend to overlook as we get swept along in the euphoria. Personally, all the many new bits of kit I've tried over many years and subsequently ended up buying have sounded good from the off, then improved over a relatively short period of time. I had an interesting experience with a cable where at first I thought it had promise but it sounded a bit strident and lacking bass. I stuck with it and really loved it, so much so that I bought an identical one for another source and, as a matter of interest, swapped it out with the existing one. Hand on heart, I couldn't tell the difference. Perhaps it's just me, but you really can't underestimate the psychology around this stuff.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by glevethan
GREAT thread - and not because it will save me some money. Nice to read such articulate debate about the differing views on these cables.
Jon
"Except musical timing".
I think all of us, as Naim users, will agree that this is one of the most important qualities which attracted us to the brand. If you are continuing to use SL speaker cable that would imply (to me) that the other advantages SL brings to the party outweigh the disminished performance in musical timing??
Best
Gregg
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by nigelb
Very interesting.
I 'auditioned' the SL speaker cables long and hard in my system and swapped between them and NACA5 several times. The clear difference to me at the time was a degree of thickening I would describe it as (the OP describes this as midrange hash), which I never knew was present with the NACA5, but was (almost) entirely removed by the SL speaker cables. I heard this several times each time I swapped the cables over. One thing I didn't notice however was a reduction in PRaT with the SL speaker cables. Overall I had a clear preference for the SL cables. I didn't want to like them because of their huge cost, but I did.
It just goes to show how these these things can manifest themselves in different systems, how our preferences vary and how our ears and brains vary in how they interpret the sounds we hear. That is what makes this hobby so interesting. NOTHING is a given.
as a matter of interest nidelb, what speakers do you use with SL wire? -- doesnt say in your profile...
beginning to wonder whether there may be some axtra 'tuning' required for SL wire epending on speaker? Ho hum...
enjoy
ken
Ken
My speakers are not the obvious choice for Naim, being Monitor Audio GX300 speakers which lends some weight to the argument that SL speaker cables work well with non-Naim speakers.
Reading through this thread one or two have mentioned timing with SL cables (I referred to PRaT) but none have come out and actually said that timing with SL speaker cables is actually inferior to NACA5. Possibly Steve was suggesting this but I am not clear. I would however agree the SLs are superior in many ways but probably no better than NACA5s as far as timing is concerned. I was listening to some pretty fast stuff this afternoon with the SL speaker cables and timing sounded spot on to me, feet a-tapping, head a-nodding - always a sure sign PRaT is in good shape.
Due to the differing views on the SL speaker cables however I would strongly suggest a lengthy home trial with run-in SL speaker cables. I further suggest you do not take a punt on these. I borrowed ex-dem (i.e. run in) SL speaker cables for a week and these were the same cables I bought so I cannot comment on potential issues with brand new cables that may or may not require a significant amount of running in.
Would be interested to hear your findings if you do a home demo with these cables.
Posted on: 03 February 2016 by Happy Listener
Having had SL cables (full loom) for many months, I agree with Jon H's view.
I sometimes miss the 'thwack' on a drum but the positive attributes far outweigh this aspect of 'attack'. Another telling aspect is that my 552 is now exploring 11 o'clock on the dial via LP12, whereas with NACA5 it couldn't comfortably lift >9-30ish, before things became over-bright in my room.
Like all 'upgrades' (in '' as not all are!), YMMV.
I'm now wondering what the 500DR conversion will bring to the mix - come on Mr J.N., spill the beans soon please.
