| Kimber
BiFocal
- XL
Speaker
Cable |
|
A
Clearer
Vision? |
|
Adnan
Arduman |
|
21
August 2001 |
Specifications
Price:
$1,920 for an
eight-foot pair
Manufacturer:
KIMBER KABLE
2752 South 1900
West, Ogden, Utah
84401
Tel: 801.621.5530
Fax: 801.627.6980
Web: www.kimber.com
Support and
technical
questions: support@kimber.com
Product literature
requests: info@kimber.com
I
delayed the
testing and
reviewing
processes for
quite a while
although the
Kimber BiFocal -
XL Speaker cables
have been
connected to my
system for more
than six months
now. Such a long
waiting time has
an explanation
that goes beyond
pure laziness.
As
the cable's
burn-in was
getting near to
its completion, I
upgraded my
digital front end
with the wonderful
Marantz SA-1. Of
course, the new CD
player also needed
at least 300 hours
of break in. It is
relatively easy to
break-in an
interconnect or a
digital cable as
you don't
necessarily need
to turn on your
power amps. Just
operate your CD
player and/or your
preamplifier and
play a CD on
"repeat"
as long as you
wish. In fact, I
recommend that you
play different
complex music
materials instead
of a special
break-in CD with
designed signals.
In the case of
speaker cables,
you need to
physically play
music through your
speakers (which is
not so tragic),
but as I can't
play music
continuously for
24 hours due to
safety, tube life
and noise
constraints, the
completion of
minimum 300 hours
break-in period
took months.
Secondly,
I prefer to write
comparative
reviews. My
reference cable of
many years is the
Van den Hul
Revelation. To be
on the fair side,
I thought that the
Kimber cables
needed at least
600 - 700 hours of
break-in. I agree
that after 300
hours you get
marginal
improvements, but
margins are what
we are after, isn’t
it?
Unfortunately,
the two cables
don't share the
same price
category. Even
though the Kimber
BiFocal - XL is
nearly twice the
price of the Van
den Hul
Revelation, I
still needed a
reference and the
Van den Hul
Revelation, being
a classic in its
category, was
perfectly suitable
for the job. For
many years now
they have kept
their static
position between
my power amps and
my speakers,
fending off many
other more
expensive
contenders that I
tried. After all,
we know that a
higher price is
not always an
indication of a
better sound.
Technical
Information
As
the name
indicates, the
cable is
specifically
designed to be
used for
"bi-wire"
applications with
speakers having
independent
binding posts for
high and low
frequencies. If
this is not your
case and you have
either single or
triple
connections, then
you would use
either the Monocle
- X or XL or the
TriFocal - X or
XL. Monocle,
BiFocal and
TriFocal are
Kimber's top three
standard series
speaker cables,
just below the
Select range.
BiFocal-XL
uses twelve
conductors for the
inner, high
frequency circuit
and twenty-four
conductors for the
outer, low
frequency circuit
in a dual
concentric format.
Electrical
isolation is
accomplished by
correlating
circuit geometries
with an isolating
ESD matrix. The
physical aspects
can be summarized
as follows:
-
Thirty-six
discrete
conductors
-
5.5awg
/ 15mm2
-
Hyper-pure
copper
-
Varistrand
geometry
-
X38R
acoustic and
electrostatic
sinking core
compound
-
Unique
correlation
circuit and
alternating
dielectric
matrix
-
31mm
diameter
-
Terminated
with WBT
spades or
bananas
Similar
in construction
and technology to
BiFocal-X, the
BiFocal-XL is the
heavier gauge
version, using
twice as many
conductors (36 as
opposed to 18).
I
ordered my test
sample terminated
with spades on the
amplifier side and
with banana plugs
on the speaker
side. As my ProAc
3.8 speaker's two
pairs of binding
posts are placed
relatively close
to each other, the
use of banana
plugs at that end
offers much more
convenience than
spades. I also
would like to draw
your attention to
their use of top
quality
terminators. They
use WBT-0660
spades that have
sandwich type
construction with
elastometer shock
absorbers to allow
progressive
contact pressure
and WBT-0645
banana plugs with
additional plastic
safety pins (to
prevent children
from sticking them
into the mains)
and expanding
inner spikes for
high contact
pressure.
Listening
and Comparing
I
first chose just
three or four CD's
with which I was
going to carry out
the comparative
listening tests,
but their
diversity and
number grew during
the course of the
listening session.
Every CD had a
specific test
track that I
listened to with
both sets of
cables in A-B-A
fashion. More
precisely, I first
connected the
Kimbers and
listened to all
the test tracks,
then repeated the
process with the
Van den Huls and
finally went back
to Kimbers and
listened one more
time. Doing A-B-A
testing gives you
the chance to hear
the differences
when you pass from
A to B, but it is
possible to
discern other
nuances when you
switch back from B
to A.
Before
telling you my
impressions (and
thus possibly to
increase the
suspense level), I
will begin by
giving you the
list my evaluation
CD's:
Shostakovich
Symphony 8,
Concertgebouw/Haitink
[Decca 411 616-2]
A
legendary
orchestra
recording, I use
it to discern
dynamics, stage
presentation,
resolution and
bass control
performance.
Shostakovich
Symphony 13
"Babi Yar",
Concertgebouw/Haitink
[Decca 417 261-2]
An
excellent
recording for
testing the
resolution
ability of
massed vocals on
male choir.
Cantate
Domino by
Motettkor,
Nilsson, Linder,
Mellnas [Proprius
PRCD 7762]
Track
12 of this
recording offers
an organ that
goes to very low
frequencies,
possibly down to
20 Hz. It is
very good to
assess the bass
extension. In
addition, the
soprano voice is
so liquid!
Saint-Saëns
Symphony 3,
"Organ",
BPO/Levine [DG 419
617-2]
This
is another
excellent
recording for
dynamics, tone
color and
orchestral
resolution.
R.
Strauss Violin
Sonata E flat
major, Op.18,
Chung, Zimerman
[DG 427 617-2]
A
wonderful tool
for timber
evaluation of
the two most
difficult
acoustic
instruments:
violin and
piano. This is a
real acid test!
Tracing
Astor by Gidon
Kremer [Nonesuch
79601-2]
This
recording is
outstanding for
assessing violin
tonality and
inner detail.
Rickie
Lee Jones’ It's
Like This
[Artemis Records
751 054-2]
This
is a great
modern recording
that allows you
to test the
purity and the
sparkle of the
triangles on the
first track. In
addition, there
is Rickie Lee
Jones' lush
voice!
VitalTechTones
VTT2 [Tone
Center TC-40082]
Here
is an excellent
recording of a
fusion trio
offering a
beautiful
electric bass
tone for
evaluation. This
helps you to
evaluate the
roundness,
definition and
the tightness of
this bass played
by Victor
Wooten. He is a
real magician!
Keith
Jarrett’s Bye,
Bye Blackbird
[ECM 1467]
Another
classic trio
recording that I
have used for so
long as a test
CD that I could
not skip this
time.
Esbjorn
Svensson Trio’s Good
Morning Susie Soho
[ACT 9009-2]
This
is a beautiful
modern recording
of a Swedish
jazz trio. What
music! I used it
to evaluate the
cymbals and
piano tonality,
as well as bass
control.
I
will start by
telling you that
tonality wise,
both cables
sounded very
correct and
natural. The vdH
was slightly
darker and softer
but both sounded
very much alike as
far as timber
accuracy is
concerned. In
other words,
neither showed any
hint of
coloration. That's
really a big plus
for the two cables
in question. For
me, timbral
accuracy has the
highest level of
priority: if any
component fails
there, I usually
don't go any
further. I don't
care if the
component has a
great bass,
staging or
anything else if
they add their own
color to the
music. An analogy
may be a very
high-resolution
camera lens that
adds pink color to
everything
photographed
through it, as if
using a permanent
pink filter.
The
similarities stop
at this point
though. The
biggest difference
lies in the area
of soundstage
presentation.
While the vdH's
sound stage
boundaries are the
height and width
of the two
speakers with a
little depth, the
Kimber's stage
presentation goes
well beyond the
speakers. It is
much deeper,
higher and wider.
Many
other differences
seem to be the
byproducts of this
soundstage
presentation
handling. The
Kimbers also offer
more headroom,
dynamics, air,
effortless
feeling,
palpability and
better-defined
contours. The
vdH's weaknesses
in such areas seem
to be the result
of their smaller
soundstage. As the
sound comes from a
smaller area, it
is more condensed
and compressed.
There is less air
between
instruments and
consequently their
ability to resolve
inner detail is
decreased. With
the vdHs, crowded
orchestral
passages seem to
be muddier and
tiring, whereas
the Kimber's
considerably
bigger and deeper
soundstage gives
you the feeling of
a more relaxed,
effortless,
cleaner and more
see-through,
sharper sound. Are
attributes like
headroom,
dynamics, air and
definition really
the byproducts of
the cables
superior
soundstaging
abilities? I don't
know. I just had
the feeling that
they were.
However,
the differences
are not just
limited to the
soundstage and to
its byproducts. I
found the Kimber's
treble to have
much more sparkle,
detail and
extension. It was
cleaner and
shinier. In
addition, this
extra polish and
detail is not at
all accompanied by
nasty elements
such as edginess,
harshness and
fatigue. In
comparison, the
vdHs seemed
duller, muted and
veiled.
Another
very important
difference was
noticeable in the
bass area. The
Kimbers offer more
extension and
weight, which they
readily revealed
with the very low
organ notes of the
Cantate Domino.
Track 12 of that
recording is an
excellent tool to
test the extension
of the low
frequencies which
they present
crisper than the
vdHs. I think that
better controlled
and extended bass
also increases the
feeling of the
rhythm. In
comparison, the
vdH's bass seemed
looser and less
defined. The
better bass
shaping (or
definition) also
helps the mids to
be cleaner and
more detailed.
Overall, the vdHs
sounded dull,
lifeless, small,
two-dimensional
and consequently
less involving
then the Kimbers.
I
may conclude my
impressions with
an analogy that
seems very
accurate to
describe the
differences
between the two
cables. Have you
ever compared the
two layers of a
hybrid SACD disc?
I suspect most of
you have. What you
hear when you
switch from the CD
layer to SACD is
nearly the
duplicate of what
you notice when
you switch from
the Van den Hul
Revelation to the
Kimber BiFocal -
XL. Between the
two layers of a
hybrid SACD there
is nearly no tonal
difference, but
the SACD offers a
better holographic
presentation, more
ambience,
low-level detail,
air, headroom,
effortlessness and
resolution.
Although less
subtle, the Kimber
BiFocal - XL's
improvements were
very similar. If
you also consider
the significant
differences at
both frequency
extremes, I can
easily state that
the Kimber BiFocal
- XL did more than
SACD when compared
with a very decent
cable such as Van
den Hul
Revelation.
The
Kimber BiFocal -
XL is truly a
great speaker
cable. I decided
to buy and keep
them in my system.
Since the BiFocal
- XL is so devoid
of any noticeable
weakness, I wonder
what the Select
series of speaker
cables will sound
like. I really
look forward to
testing them one
day.

|