No they don't have any form of network in them, they are just extremely well designed cables. @CJ14 should be able to give you the full lowdown.
I think it would be (very) difficult to design a speaker cable badly.
You'd be surprised.........
Like I said I would be happy to. Unfortunately, in some 40 years of dabbling in the hobby I have found cables to make minor differences compared to other stuff.
Oddly enough I have a digital toslink cable with multi stranded optical fibres, a few hundred rather than one, which I treasure and swear by.
Go figure.
IMO the number 1 "other stuff" factor is the room. If you have bad acoustics (e.g. small square untreated room with solid brick and plaster walls) then everything else is damage limitation.Unfortunately, in some 40 years of dabbling in the hobby I have found cables to make minor differences compared to other stuff
The good news is, thanks to Alan, you can easily find out by getting a loan of the cables to try yourself. Much more reliable than looking for a mechanical reason as to why they might make a difference!
I wish more manufacturers would put their money where their advertising speil is and do test loans - I suspect I know why they don't though.
I'll leave the clever stuff to Alan or Colin, but my ewa LS-80 speaker cables cost about double my EWA Q20 amp, and are the best value for money/bang for buck I've had in my 40-odd years of listening to music.. Get yourself on the list for the loan pair, all it'll cost is the postage and then possibly the price of a pair...!Fair enough and you have tried them, I have not. Personally I would want to know why something as simple as a cable can alter sound to such an extent (or ... how other cables neuter sound and this one doesnt). There are other examples of cables that have some passive components other than a cable/jacket and some prefer it.
Perhaps the manufacturer cares to comment?
I'll leave the clever stuff to Alan or Colin, but my ewa LS-80 speaker cables cost about double my EWA Q20 amp, and are the best value for money/bang for buck I've had in my 40-odd years of listening to music.. Get yourself on the list for the loan pair, all it'll cost is the postage and then possibly the price of a pair...!
I will (lower end one, LS25) but I REALLY would like to see and read about the make-up of it before doing so (if I re-employ my passive speakers in a third system).
Surely there must be some technical info on it and pictures of an un-terminated pair?
From your description it appears that the original Chord Signature is very different from the Signature XL. The current Signature XL is significantly bass light in comparison to the Epic and NACA5. The bass of the XL is lean, giving an impression of reduced bass but in reality it goes deeper with improved definition and detail ie. you hear better layering and texture in the bass with the leaner bass output whereas it's just a big fat ballsy bass with the Epic which masks the fine detail or changes in the bass. The upper bass of the NACA5 sticks out more to give the PRAT but the low bass is missing.I was probably being a bit over simplistic by saying darker or forward sounding as there were other subtleties too. I had Epic for a couple of years and it worked really well with a NAP200, much preferable to NACA 5. Your description of NACA 5 sounds similar to my impression, I'm not a fan of it really, it's only positive characteristic IMO is that it does PRAT really well. The Ecosse also does PRAT really well but with much more detail, refinement and soundstage, partly due to being more airy. I switched to Ecosse when I changed to the Avondale amp as it is more relaxed sounding than the NAP200 and the Epic was too much of a good thing with it. The Signatures I tried were the original version and I only had them briefly before going to Ecosse. Really didn't get on with the signatures, a very bass heavy sound which seemed to sap the life out of the music. I was surprised at the time as I was expecting them to be brighter if anything based on reviews, which would have moved my sound in the right direction at the time.
One thing that might be relevant is that the Epos speakers are a 3 way design with have no crossover network, just a capacitor for the tweeter. It may be that the lack of an electronic filter network (inductors, resistors, capacitors) makes them more susceptible to the characteristics of the cable?
Both be good. Hopefully he can shed some light on what makes his cables different.
Everything is relative. There will be people who hear noticeable or remarkable differences in amplifiers and there will be others who regard those differences as minor or negligible.Like I said I would be happy to. Unfortunately, in some 40 years of dabbling in the hobby I have found cables to make minor differences compared to other stuff.
Fair enough and you have tried them, I have not. Personally I would want to know why something as simple as a cable can alter sound to such an extent (or ... how other cables neuter sound and this one doesnt). There are other examples of cables that have some passive components other than a cable/jacket and some prefer it.
Perhaps the manufacturer cares to comment?
Trust me when l say l was more curious about folk on this forum liking them, that is why l took the plunge and tried them and glad l did, l would say they were like a component upgrade.
Or why not put your name on the loaner list and feel the love?