April 5, 2016

  • XLO Signature 2.1, Part 5

    My 24th birthday (way back in 1996!) was one of the most memorable. After dinner, ACS and I went over to her place. After kicking off our shoes, and putting down our stuff, she led me to her room. Along the baseboards on one wall were bags and bags of new, never-worn Victoria's Secret (where she still worked part-time) lingerie. She had a cornucopia of styles and colors. There would never be enough time to try them all on. So for my birthday, ACS narrowed it down, and chose to model just (just!) the matching bra-&-panty sets.

    As with anything full of variety, some sets just were not the right match for her body. Some were so-so, kind of mundane. But when a set stood out, it had the power to make me drop my thoughts, and want to bum rush ACS.

    Ah, those were the days when ACS likened the myriad audio interconnect brands and models to lingerie. She thought it was interesting and fun, that audiophiles could change the sound of their systems, just by using different cables. ACS liked to vary her degree of sexiness, by donning different types and colors of VS lingerie. Except that she had more fun than I, because lingerie, sadly, was significantly cheaper than cables.
    IMG_2686
    It's time to narrow it down, and compare just the original XLO Signature 2.1 to the current-production S3-2. Remember: we use the correct methodology, and have treated both on an audiodharma Cable Cooker, and followed that up with weeks of regular playing time.
    IMG_2687
    The original XLO Signature series, including the S2.1 balanced interconnect, supposedly hit the market in late 1992. Their XLRs were designed and built in-house. As I have chronicled for years, these XLRs are excellent; that is, they do NOT exhibit that ubiquitous rolled-off treble, so prevalent in other companies' plugs. Why change a good thing? The S3-2 still utilizes this over 20-year-old XLR model. The only difference is that the rubber gasket is of different diameter/circumference, in order to accommodate the S3-2's wider girth (get your mind out of the gutter).

    Really, this comparison is a matter of "different, but equal." One is not, by itself, better than the other. It depends on what your sources, system, and room truly sound like.

    I don't think there was a wide price variation in all those VS lingerie sets ACS had. It was one thing to hold each set up in the air, and get all judgmental about how they looked, dangling from your hand(s). It was quite another, to have ACS wear a set, and ask her how each set made her feel and look. Since she was professionally trained, in knowing how to get the right fit, it was then a matter of comfort. Certain cuts, fabrics, underwires, elastics, metals could feel more/less comfortable, supportive, or mobile. And then there was my opinion, on how each set looked on her.

    The original Signature 2.1 will do a good job of not letting the images get blurry or meld into each other (assuming the recording has image integrity). This interconnect does have the ability, cleanliness, and transparency, to let you see through the soundscape. It will do a good job of not interfering with the music's speeds. The Signature 2.1 will not bloat the bass, puff up the mids, curtail treble extension, or slur voices.

    The XLO S3-2 will sound fuller, warmer, and rounder, but not to the excessive levels, so commonly prevalent in audiophile interconnects. By having larger images, the S3-2 does possess less space between said images. The S3-2 will not stop the music from charging. So while the S3-2 is not artificially smooth, it does sound a bit less jittery and angular than the original S2.1.
    IMG_2688
    As an example, my Simaudio Evolution 750D and 600i are honest performers. They are relatively free from distortion. While both of these XLO interconnects will easily reveal that the 750D's transport rolls off the treble, it is actually the more transparent original S2.1, which allows this Simaudio duo to reach just a little higher.

    The XLO Signature's use of magenta and black colors does remind me of ACS' VS lingerie. She actually looked okay, in magenta-&-black. Among the singular solid colors, cream, gold, pink, red, white, and yellow lingerie did not look good on her round, squat, and pear-shaped body. Black, peach, and purple were meh, acceptable, and so-so on ACS. The blue, burgundy, magenta, and teal sets were above average. But this one kind of jade (darker than emerald, but lighter than forest green) green set was totally ravishing on ACS. It made me forget about sports and audio (no easy feat!). Good as that jade set looked on her, it made me want to tackle ACS, rip it off, and dive in :-)

    So which XLO interconnect would come closer to the equivalent of NO underwear at all? Due to its greater see-through transparency, that would be the original Signature 2.1.