MEASUREMENTS: Knockoff "Kimber Kable" 12TC Speaker Cables. And do cable risers / lifters / elevators make a difference?

 

As I'm sure we're all aware, in the world of luxury goods, there will be fakes out there. Wandering the streets of basically any city these days, we'll run into all kinds of cheap "Gucci" and "Hermès" bags, fake "Rolex" and "Omega" watches, knock-off "Nike" sneakers, and counterfeit "Ray-Ban" sunglasses.

So too in the world of the audiophile. It's not hard these days to browse through "used" eBay listings or explore the copious products on Alibaba/AliExpress to find fake "High End Audio" products.

As you probably know, I'm not one to be impressed by most cable claims and believe that there's little value in a lot of what's being sold (collected articles here). Given the high prices for lengths of wire, is it any wonder then that some might want to capitalize on brand names to entice buyers?

A friend who knows I'm into audio stuff, "for fun", decided to get me the cables in the picture above from Singapore recently while on a business trip. The cables are more than likely made in China. As you can see, these are labeled as "Kimber Kable", with the same geometry and supposed build of 12TC speaker cables. He purchased them for <US$75 as a pair of 2.5m lengths.

[Back in 2015, I examined and had a listen to genuine Kimber 8TC.]

Let's price out the genuine 12TC cables in January 2023:

As you can see, we're looking at US$945 for the genuine item. At a mere 8% of that asking price at $75, it would be quite the deal if they sounded and measured well, right?

While I don't have the genuine 12TC here for direct comparison, let's look at the Kimber Kable website. We see that a run of the 12TC is composed of 24 strands of 19.5AWG equivalent "OFE" (Oxygen-Free Electronic) copper, so a combined 12-strands for each polarity would be equivalent to 8AWG. The insulation is Teflon (white and clear color). Good to see that Kimber has provided some electrical specs unlike many other companies (like AudioQuest):

See Kimber website.

Here's a closer look at the weaving pattern of the knock-off cable:

The cable does indeed measure around 0.6" diameter as per the Kimber diagram. Hard to tell if the individual strands are of varying gauge as per Kimber's "VariStrand" feature without cutting the cable; looks right though from what I can see. The banana plugs are about 5.1mm diameter as well and similar to the genuine "SBAN":

The printing is clean and comparable to pictures I've seen online of the genuine 12TC, although the spacing between the letter 'E' and the +/- signs is closer than most images I've seen. My friend tells me that the description of the item from the seller in Singapore is that the connectors are rhodium plated (like "white gold"). If true, this is good in that rhodium (itself a precious metal) is harder than gold, also doesn't tarnish, but not as conductive. As a very thin plated layer, this would still be very low resistance / impedance given the large conductive surface.

I see that Furutech is a proponent of rhodium plating. Just make sure not to go nuts about the plating like these guys - ~1 micron rhodium layer isn't going to suddenly make your music "sound harsh". ;-)

Overall, the build quality feels quite good. The girth and construction obviously makes it more stiff than zip cord cables, but still quite pliable bending around corners.

With the electrical specifications above, let's use the calibrated Reed R5001 LCR Meter and see what numbers it comes up with for these cables:

Well, that's not bad at all objectively! Compare these numbers with the cables here and here for some context. Notice that I measured the two cables (R & L) separately and we can see that the results are very similar, suggesting good consistency in the manufacturing process.

The low resistance suggests that the material is indeed copper inside, an appropriate result for 8AWG equivalent wire, and good termination with the banana plugs (don't know if soldered, welded or crimped internally). The fact that resistance remains low from 100Hz to 100kHz tells us that there's little skin effect thanks to the multiple insulated thinner multistrand geometry. Skin effect is important for high frequency applications, and I'll leave it to you if you believe this is important for analogue audio signals. Inductance values as well are low, especially at the 100Hz reading.

However, everything has a price, right? With the multistrand braided construction, we see an elevation in capacitance to around 150pF/foot. While high compared to "zip cord" cables, this should still be safe from ultrasonic oscillations when paired with older amplifiers (discussed previously). It is still much lower than Polk Cobra cables that measure around 500pF/foot for example.

With such low resistance, the insertion loss is minimal (10' Asian 12TC to 4Ω load) =  -0.013dB, using the 10kHz value of Cable 1, even lower with Cable 2.

Modeling the frequency response and phase characteristics as an RLC "filter", a 10' length of this cable connected to 4Ω load would look like this:

As expected, there would be miniscule variation in frequency response change and phase shift (-0.018dB and <-4° at 20kHz). We're talking about electrical properties measured in micro Henries, and pico Farads. Of course this is a simplification since I'm simulating with a 4Ω resistive load. Real speakers would be more complex (but that doesn't mean it's in any way mystical!).

If we look at the official Kimber Kable electrical specs above, the Asian counterfeit has similar measured characteristics. For example, with Cable 1 at 10kHz, we see a measured parallel capacitance (Cp) of 492 pF/m - compare this to Kimber's number of 494pF/m. DC resistance of the Asian counterfeit is around 0.01Ω/m for Cable 1 and 0.008Ω/m for Cable 2 - Kimber's number is 0.005Ω/m but we don't know specifics like whether that was measured with banana plugs or just the raw cable resistance. It's even harder to compare the series inductance value without specifics since this is frequency dependent. I don't think it's unreasonable then to suspect that a genuine Kimber Kable 12TC would present with similar measured results.

Good fitting banana plugs with my speakers.

Subjective Impressions & Conclusions

Audiophiles like to talk about cables as "tuning" devices and "filters" but obviously they're very weak for this purpose unless you buy something that intentionally induces roll-offs - like the MIT cables - see patent 5,142,252 where they talk about inserting 20μH to 1mH inductance. Obviously, it's way better to buy a proper EQ unit if you really want to "tune" the sound to your liking than be forced by a company's wire design!

So, how do these counterfeit cables "sound"? In a word: transparent.

I used some of the test tracks suggested previously to listen to the frequency response, clarity, details, transient speed, soundstage, etc... Yeah, we could spend time and many paragraphs describing the sound but there's no point since these "sound" like other high diameter speaker cables. It sounds great connected to my Paradigm Reference Signature S8 floor-standers using the Hypex nCore NC252MP DIY amp fed with balanced input from the RME ADI-2 Pro FS Black Edition DAC.

Like with my Kimber 8TC article a number of years back, I even tried listening with one speaker connected with the knock-off 12TC and the other side with my usual "Archimago's Colorful Speaker Cables" and could hear no differences - no anomalies like an unnatural soundstage balance, or tonal irregularities despite differences in construction and length even (only about 1.5-feet difference).

Let me be clear guys and gals. I'm not suggesting that anyone buy fake/counterfeit cables! It's obviously unethical to steal the "Kimber Kable" name and logo.

What I can say however from the analysis and listening is that these counterfeit "Kimber" 12TC-like cables from Singapore purchased at around US$75 are absolutely fine for hi-fi playback and would be excellent whether there's a fake "Kimber Kable" label or not. They measure well, "sound" great, and look nice. Since I can't confirm the provenance of these cables, one should not make any assumptions about the quality of similar looking wires.

Looking around the Internet, I found it interesting that often people don't comment on how "fake" cables sound. For example, this guy teases with "I am back! With fake speaker cables!" showing some fake Siltechs, swings it around saying "it doesn't feel like a $3000 cable" (seriously, is expensive cable supposed to feel a certain way?). So "How do they sound? Let's not talk about that on YouTube... It's interesting though." ;-) Why not talk about that on YouTube? What's so "interesting" about the sound?

Although these are openly counterfeit 12TC cables, let's not beat around the bush. Most of the "High End", high priced cable Industry IMO is selling snake oil anyways when they claim massive audible differences. It's basically all about appearances and telling stories about how their dielectric choices, conductors used, and geometries are better than someone else's product. While RLC values will measurably change, there's low likelihood of audibility with controlled listening tests for good designs. That and I believe some "High End" cables are made in China anyways, so I guess there's something poetic about fake products emulating products advertised with fake claims, often made in the same country.

PS: Looks like one can source the raw cable from Amazon. And I'm guessing GR Research uses a similar product for their speaker cables (also see here).

------------------------------

DIY toilet roll cable riser as found on StereoNET. ;-)

To end, let's talk about something even more "fun"! The topic of CABLE RISERS / LIFTERS / ELEVATORS!

They come in all kinds of shapes and sizes (check out the "Cable Lift" section). Various materials have been used and depending on the device, how high they raise the cables off the floor will vary as well. There could be practical reasons to use cable risers if one wants to keep cables apart or if it's esthetically pleasing. That's not what is controversial. Rather, we see claims on YouTube like this GR Research one suggesting that "it's amazing how much difference that makes" with DIY Tinker Toy risers when he started doing it - sure. Of course Paul McGowan hears a difference also - nothing gets past that guy! Amazing that he doesn't even bother trying to peddle any theories in that video as to why he thinks risers only apply to speaker cables.

Well, since I had these Kimber 12TC-like cables out with the measurement gear, and since it has been cool, and dry here in Vancouver over the last few days (I wonder if static is supposed to play a part in the effect), let's take this stuff downstairs and try rising/elevating/lifting the cables.

Since the "science" of cable risers appears to be rather murky, let's see what might make a good (attractive?) cable riser? How about this:

A lovely set of 4 pastel-colored ceramic BIA International bowls I found in my kitchen. They will lift the cables 2.5" which I assume should be adequate to make a difference - I've seen people use all kinds of other materials like porcelain, glass, paper, cardboard, plastic, carbon fiber, and wood.

Here's a picture of what the set-up looks like while measuring the parallel capacitance with the 12TC cables lifted off the synthetic carpet in the sound room (some believe there's an effect because the electromagnetic field interacts with nearby dielectric materials like the synthetic carpet, and air being preferred).

Since there's a little bit of sag, I checked that the cables were >1.5" off the carpet at the lowest points, and 2.5" on top of the bowls/risers of course.

So, does doing that change any of the measurements? Again, here are the cable RLC results normalized to values/foot:

As you can imagine, each reading will bring with it some inter-test variability. We're still looking at numbers in the same ballpark. Nothing here to suggest that raising the cable off the carpet by >2" on average substantially changes values enough to affect sonic performance. Notice in particular the lack of any consistent shift in the capacitance which should be affected by dielectric change since the cable is now surrounded by mostly "air".

Do I hear any difference whether I elevated the cables with the bowls when I connected them to my speakers? No. And yes, I have tried raising my cables using all kinds of other things like plastic boxes, wooden blocks, and toilet paper rolls since the late '90s dabbling in this audiophile hobby; never noticing anything worthwhile to keep it going.

With apologies to Wesley M. Wilson.

As usual, people are entitled to their subjective impressions, and I think in life we probably can remember examples of very intelligent people who hold unusual beliefs, sometimes even bizarre beliefs based on faith, emotions, or uncorrected misperceptions. My strong suspicion is that this is the nature of many audiophiles who are otherwise rational individuals in other domains of life despite their insistence on the audible benefits of something like cable risers. As obsessive hobbyists, I can appreciate the allure of believing that "everything matters" when obviously this cannot be true. I suspect that in the years ahead, the pendulum will swing and we will see the day when purely subjective "my truth" claims will clearly not be good enough for the vast majority of audiophiles even; evidence is needed.

Referring to the YouTube videos above, for guys like Danny Richie of GR Research or Paul McGowan of PS Audio, if one counters that cable lifters don't make a difference, the usual retort is probably something like "your system isn't to a high enough level". But isn't it just as likely that "realistic people don't have imaginations like yours and would be a bit more mindful of what we say" without evidence because the Internet never forgets?

Instead of a video, if you want to read some interesting content about cable risers/elevators, check out this comment from Galen Gareis of Iconoclast Cables and others of his in the thread. Notice the way he wraps words around concepts to create a sense of complexity about electromagnetic fields and interactions between various materials. Ultimately, despite all the "science-y" talk, I think the reader ends up with zero practical take-home understanding of whether cable risers work. Notice the lack of any context around the magnitude of effect. Notice the lack of any data to show that the "influences" he talks about have any meaningful impact on signals in the audio frequencies. It's basically just a lot of hypothetical razzle dazzle about principles in physics but ultimately no meaningful real-world demonstration of anything for audiophiles. This is often the nature of "white papers" from suspicious audiophile companies as well. Again, Mr. Gareis sells cables for a living of course...

One last thing, speaking of imagining things, at the risk of giving him more views, why in the world is Hans Beekhuyzen continuing to push on topics like "Why (network) switches influence the sound quality"? I'm guessing he's being paid (it could be payment-in-kind) to talk nonsense and perpetuate FUD from sponsors. It's rather obvious that ethernet switches don't affect sound with any decent DAC where temporal performance is isolated to the internal clock. His illustrations literally are just cartoons that exaggerate putative issues and have no correlation with the performance of modern devices! I guess the need for him to focus on this is perhaps a good sign that he and the companies that make such ludicrous products might be experiencing a loss of faith among the "High End" audio buying public. Keep it simple audiophiles, Bits Are Bits with reputable 21st Century digital audio unless shown otherwise in a transparent fashion, and be careful of cheerleaders like Beekhuyzen.

Until next time, stay cool and be rational, friends. 

I hope you're enjoying the music!