This is a review and measurements of both XLR Kimber Kable Silver Streak and Neo d+ (by Oyaide).
I was inspired again by the recent review of Amir, and not only did I have this Kimber Silver Streak cable, which I acquired a long time ago being told it would make a difference, I also discovered that it is still produced by the company as part of their "Summit" line. So, that triggered this second (and probable last) cable review from me.
Presentation
The Kimber has a cost of roughly $1'000 (1m) and the Neo d+ reaches up to $50 in 1m length, per what I saw. So the cost ratio is a good 20 between the two cables.
The Kimber Silver Streak uses one silver strand and two copper (go figure). BUT mine has two silver strands, probably because it is an old version of it, or the balanced version?
The XLR connectors are said to be silver plated too. I like a lot the look, the lightness, the quality of the connectors and ease of use as the cable bends easily. This cable targets the audiophile community.
Some specs are provided by Kimber (XLR):
The Neo d+ uses quality XLR connectors too (Gold plated bronze alloy), but despite their shorter length, they can sometimes be problematic because the flat cable itself is not as flexible as the one of the Kimber. But in the end, you need space behind the device for both of these cables.
The weight of the Neo can be a problem as they were pulling hard on the little Topping D50III that I used to test them, less so with the Kimber.
I like a lot the look of the Neo too and the ease of identification of their respective colors for left/right channels, even in the dark, which is on purpose as they target the DJ community. I currently use Neo d+ cables for my main system and I'm happy with them.
I could not find technical specs for the Neo d+.
As with my previous review, and since I don't have a super duper Audio Precision, I'm using a Topping D50III as the generator and a combo of Cosmos Scaler and E1AD ADCiso (Grade 0) as the ADC. So, first, let's have a look at the total performance of these in a loopback, using my standard TRS Cordial CMN2200 cable:
This is a whooping 123.6db SINAD (4VRMS output) which would put the Topping D50III right where it is in Amir's chart: at the top of it.
If you compare with the review of Amir, this is the same SINAD but I get a little more distortion (just above -140dBr), which could be from the Topping or from my ADC setup. Either ways, this is the limit of the Audio Precision in terms of Noise (at 4Vrms), so it is good to see I can replicate and get the same measurements. With that precision, if one of these cable makes a difference, we'll see it.
Note that because the Topping D50III has TRS outputs only, I had to use a adaptor TRS to XLR for both cables under test. And same on the ADC side, by the way.
So let's start with the Kimber:
Same, no change, no degradation. Only 0.1dB difference in SINAD (123.5dB) which could be due to the two adaptors I had to use.
Let's quickly go to the Neo d+:
Same measured performance, but the Neo shows a very little something at 50Hz (mains) and that does not impact the results beyond 0.1dB lost in SINAD (that we can reasonably ignore).
On request of the community, I'm showing what happens when I put the cable on top of the power supply of my PC (actually below it as it generates more disruption, nearly nothing when it is on top):
This is an overlay of the two cables. They show very low captured noise and are essentially the same. This is the worst case scenario as I had to ensure the cables were running on the full length of the PS and exactly in the middle of it, else there was barely anything to report. Even so, the SINAD remained more than 122dB in both cases.
I spare you measurements of bandwidth up to 200kHz or square, as Amir and I did before with other cables, there are absolutely identical.
I just add the jitter view (48kHz):
Same results again.
Conclusion
Again, nothing new, you already knew the results just by reading the title.
Does the look and ease of use of the Kimber justify paying 20 times more for the same measured performances? I let you decide.
But I'm happy to see that the Kimber delivers, as I had some doubts. I though maybe being lower in the line that it could be a reason for downgraded performances. But no, we're safe.
Enjoy your weekend!
Flo
I was inspired again by the recent review of Amir, and not only did I have this Kimber Silver Streak cable, which I acquired a long time ago being told it would make a difference, I also discovered that it is still produced by the company as part of their "Summit" line. So, that triggered this second (and probable last) cable review from me.
Presentation
The Kimber has a cost of roughly $1'000 (1m) and the Neo d+ reaches up to $50 in 1m length, per what I saw. So the cost ratio is a good 20 between the two cables.
The Kimber Silver Streak uses one silver strand and two copper (go figure). BUT mine has two silver strands, probably because it is an old version of it, or the balanced version?
The XLR connectors are said to be silver plated too. I like a lot the look, the lightness, the quality of the connectors and ease of use as the cable bends easily. This cable targets the audiophile community.
Some specs are provided by Kimber (XLR):
- (Cp) parallel capacitance: 37.1 pF/meter
- (Ls) series inductance: 1.07uH/meter
- (Rdc) dc loop resistance : 0.105 Ohm/meter
The Neo d+ uses quality XLR connectors too (Gold plated bronze alloy), but despite their shorter length, they can sometimes be problematic because the flat cable itself is not as flexible as the one of the Kimber. But in the end, you need space behind the device for both of these cables.
The weight of the Neo can be a problem as they were pulling hard on the little Topping D50III that I used to test them, less so with the Kimber.
I like a lot the look of the Neo too and the ease of identification of their respective colors for left/right channels, even in the dark, which is on purpose as they target the DJ community. I currently use Neo d+ cables for my main system and I'm happy with them.
I could not find technical specs for the Neo d+.
As with my previous review, and since I don't have a super duper Audio Precision, I'm using a Topping D50III as the generator and a combo of Cosmos Scaler and E1AD ADCiso (Grade 0) as the ADC. So, first, let's have a look at the total performance of these in a loopback, using my standard TRS Cordial CMN2200 cable:
This is a whooping 123.6db SINAD (4VRMS output) which would put the Topping D50III right where it is in Amir's chart: at the top of it.
If you compare with the review of Amir, this is the same SINAD but I get a little more distortion (just above -140dBr), which could be from the Topping or from my ADC setup. Either ways, this is the limit of the Audio Precision in terms of Noise (at 4Vrms), so it is good to see I can replicate and get the same measurements. With that precision, if one of these cable makes a difference, we'll see it.
Note that because the Topping D50III has TRS outputs only, I had to use a adaptor TRS to XLR for both cables under test. And same on the ADC side, by the way.
So let's start with the Kimber:
Same, no change, no degradation. Only 0.1dB difference in SINAD (123.5dB) which could be due to the two adaptors I had to use.
Let's quickly go to the Neo d+:
Same measured performance, but the Neo shows a very little something at 50Hz (mains) and that does not impact the results beyond 0.1dB lost in SINAD (that we can reasonably ignore).
On request of the community, I'm showing what happens when I put the cable on top of the power supply of my PC (actually below it as it generates more disruption, nearly nothing when it is on top):
This is an overlay of the two cables. They show very low captured noise and are essentially the same. This is the worst case scenario as I had to ensure the cables were running on the full length of the PS and exactly in the middle of it, else there was barely anything to report. Even so, the SINAD remained more than 122dB in both cases.
I spare you measurements of bandwidth up to 200kHz or square, as Amir and I did before with other cables, there are absolutely identical.
I just add the jitter view (48kHz):
Same results again.
Conclusion
Again, nothing new, you already knew the results just by reading the title.
Does the look and ease of use of the Kimber justify paying 20 times more for the same measured performances? I let you decide.
But I'm happy to see that the Kimber delivers, as I had some doubts. I though maybe being lower in the line that it could be a reason for downgraded performances. But no, we're safe.
Enjoy your weekend!
Flo
Last edited:
