Found an interesting way to compare IC cables...

it's only a vaild test in YOUR rig
take those cables elsewhere & all bets are off

While i agree with what you are saying Bob, would you care to venture out and say why you think that this occurs ? I'm not trying to question your comment, only trying to better understand what others think about such subjects. Sean
>

I await my Creek OBH-11 and regulated (non Creek) power adapter eagerly...Then I can have some real fun with cables.

I agree soundstage is a different matter altogether with phones. I was amazed at how vividly apparent the difference was thru the cans, which is not so easily detected by the time the sound emerges from the speakers.

I am only comparing the IC's when run between a Rotel 971 CDP and Arcam Delta 290 Integrated. The "open" cable was a Signal Cable Analog2 vs an Ecosse Conductor which sounded more veiled.

It would seem there are a number of interactions between a given cable and the component(s) that the cable connects to. Personally, I am not going to take the time to try and figure them out, and I seriously doubt I would be able to do so if I tried. I agree with Bob and Sean that a cable that is eliminated from consideration in one system says very little about how it will perform in another, unless it is fundamentally flawed in some way.

I think it depends where you plan on using the cable.

The reason I say this is because recently I changed my source to pre cables (AZ WOW) with my pre to amp cables (AZ Matrix Ref II) and was bowled over by the difference. With the WOW between the source and pre amp there was more extension and clarity, with the Matrix Ref between source and pre it was noticable smoother but quite a bit less impact and more ill defined. I expected a difference but not this much.

This is why I think the headphone test would be valid only if you tested cables in the spot you intend them to go in your normal setup.