Audio Envy Prestige Interconnect Cables

My Review of Audio Envy Prestige Interconnect Cables

A year ago in January, my wife and I traveled to Seattle to check out the city’s awesome vinyl record shops. In renowned Bop Street Records with it massive stock of used jazz on vinyl, I picked up the December 2017 issue of Record Collector News, a terrific bimonthly magazine serving vinyl collectors on the West Coast. That issue included an intriguing article by David Thomson that really drew my interest, “The Cable Guy: Meet Audio
Envy’s Captain Payne.” Captain Payne, I read, is an audio engineer and owner of Audio Envy, a Fort Collins, Colorado company with a long history of providing tools to musicians. Apparently, he experimented for nearly a decade learning from over 250 prototypes in “materials and geometry” towards an optimal cable design in audio interconnects, speaker wire, and power cords, among other cables required by musicians. Who is Audio Envy? That question took me on a deep dive to learn more.

Some Background

My interest was piqued because I had just completed an exhaustive review of two distinct generations of XLR interconnects (ICs) – five years apart in age – made by a well-respected boutique cable designer. This manufacturer has been working on cable designs for two decades. Since my hobby is making CD mini-lps from my vinyl collection, a key objective is getting the best signal possible through my phono preamp to a modified Tascam DV-RA1000XL recorder. For that I use balanced XLR ICs. Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades told me to get the best XLR I could afford since the full signal through the cable will be imparted on the recording. The most recent model I tested was said by the designer to be “more detailed, with better clarity and with a wider soundstage” compared to the model two generations earlier.



The evaluation I designed for those XLRs featured seven widely dynamic titles drawing from rock, folk, jazz and classical music. I secured 14 reviewers, all with phenomenal audio systems. Seven titles were recorded twice, once on each XLR, in identical settings at 96kHz and 24 bit. The set was rendered into a Red Book CD. I used a coin flip to determine which XLR-recorded cut was presented first in the title pair order. The CDRs were mailed to reviewers with instructions on how to avoid sequence or order bias. Simply, this was a blind test of listener preference on their systems and in their own rooms of two models of XLR cables from one manufacturer.

On preference results by reviewer, the two XLRs graded out in a dead even split at seven each. By title, the two XLRs graded out at a dead even split also. But in removing the classical piece from the tally, a dominating 83 percent of reviewer preferences were for the second title in the recorded pair (71% otherwise). My correspondence to reviewers suggested listening to the CDR first to become acquainted with the music, and before beginning serious evaluation. Research shows that more often the second selection in an evaluation was statistically preferred because the listener upon repeated hearing noticed aspects present on the first but cognitively identified only on the second listen. That may have occurred here, a result I did not expect given the defining attributes the designer claimed for his latest cable.

Several reviewers said they would be happy with either cable, even as every reviewer noted differences – some quite specific – in the sonic signature to each by title. We all hear differently and have our own preferences given our equipment, listening rooms, and music. And that arguably represents a set of factors no single cable design can overcome.

Who Is Audio Envy

Here I review RCA audio interconnects only in a live setting, fully aware of these earlier issues and in the general level of skepticism on differential cable performance. The ICs under comparative evaluation are designed and manufactured by Audio Envy, a company new to me and among a crowded field of audiophile cable purveyors. Audio Envy (AE) studied for nearly a decade the influences both materials and geometry impose upon an electrical signal in cable configurations. In that way AE slowly perfects its designs experimenting with hundreds of uniquely different prototypes, including with conductor coatings. And that process continues at AE. Captain Payne has one defining rule: if he cannot record with a cable design then play it back and hear a similar response, the design is a no go. That fact caught my attention to the point where I acquired two pairs of their most recent design in Prestige ICs (introduced in mid-2018) to test in my own system. That journey of discovery in cable design is detailed on the AE website (Technology ).

AE technology highlights very pure and as much as possible single crystal copper conductors. AE treats these conductors with a very thin non-conductive coating to prevent signal robbing oxidization. They employ tight fitting gold-plated copper connectors. Their cable is designed for optimized signal flow and made to be light, tough and flexible. The insulation on the conductor has a dielectric of 1.3 where 1.0 is perfect (vacuum or air). Then AE uses a proprietary conductor arrangement determined optimal through its exhaustive testing. Their design critically reduces capacitance and uses a conductor that minimizes stray signal conduction paths. They focus on dozens of aspects toward reducing capacitance, induction, EMI, improving coherent signal and phase timing, and cable deformation. AE cables are very well made.



The AE website features glowing customer testimonials on their cable performance. Folks who employed very expensive cables by the major name brand companies found that AE cables in their systems blew those heavy weights out of the water. To be clear, AE has deeply satisfied and loyal customers. Not to discount those reviews one bit, reviews with the same tenor are common for boutique cable purveyors. I operate in a ‘trust but verify’ mode. Cables are one product where hearing is to believe. AE knows this actually so they offer a competitive 45-day trial period, sufficient to system condition any cable. As it turns out, very, very few AE customers return cables.

Listening Objective

What I want from a cable, any cable, is to get out of the way. By that I mean I do not choose cables to add tonal color or to alter timbre. Cables in my system need to be as neutral and uncolored as possible. A signal originates at the stylus interface in a record groove or as embedded information in hard clear plastic read by a laser. That signal courses through equipment to be amplified and presented to speakers. The equipment path – tube and/or solid state – undoubtedly imparts a sonic signature while I have labored to find components faithful to the original signal presenting realism to sound reproduction. Simply, I do not use cables to tune my system.

My two main objectives for my audio system are firstly to deliver believable high-fidelity reproduction with respect to how the music would sound if I were present in the recording studio. That in and of itself is a tall order. Secondly, and nearly as important to me, cables as an audio “component” must be reasonably affordable and deemed a high value, well-designed and well-made product. They are after all, cables.

For this evaluation the listening line begins with an Ortofon Cadenza Black moving coil phono cartridge. That cartridge is mounted on Pete Riggle’s The Woody uni-pivot tonearm, 9 inches in length, and employing a Baerwald alignment. The tonearm is on a modified JA Michell Gyro SE turntable with Never Connected DC power supply, supported on maple blocks by vibration control dampers. Under the tonearm is Pete Riggle’s VTAF device to adjust stylus rake angle, critical to aligning Ortofon’s Shibata shaped styli. The signal moves through the tonearm to a Whest PS40.RDT SE phono preamp on a Discovery IV wiring harness.



The AE IC under evaluation (AE's 5th Generation) connected that phono preamp to a Conrad Johnson PV15 linestage and a second pair connected the PV15 to a Conrad Johnson MF2550SE power amplifier. The PV15 is fitted with new-old-stock Mullard M8080 vacuum tubes. The power amplifier drove the incredibly detailed Spatial Audio X2 ‘open baffle’ speakers through either Duelund DCA 12GA or Audio Envy NV-SP5 speaker cable. The ICs used for reference are the latest model (as of January 2019) by the same cable designer in the aforementioned evaluated XLRs. For each reviewer, the only change was in the two sets of ICs connecting the phono preamp to linestage to power amp.

The Whest PS.40RDT SE phono preamp is neutral by design, and the Ortofon Cadenza Black was a design target for James Henriot of Whest. The Cadenza is also neutral. Together, these components make music reproduction beautiful and realistic. Nothing gets in the way; the Cadenza reveals what is on the recording – good and bad – with astonishing detail and pinpoint imaging. The pairing delivers a beautiful tone, extended and open high-end, extremely detailed bass, and a transparent and clear mid-range. The audio system these ICs were installed in delivers to my ears and, based on comments by every reviewer, pure lifelike musicality in sound reproduction. Apparent also to each reviewer on this system were differences in the sonic signature of the evaluated ICs.

This Evaluation

For the evaluation I enlisted five hometown “audio” friends, a woman who is a musician, and four men. The guys are the owner of a local record store, a hardcore vinyl collector, a dedicated jazz buff, and an expert restorer of Lenco turntables. The test was conducted on my system, with predominately music we all knew and their ears and mine. Further, the volume for the evaluation was exactly the same for every reviewer and on every title (~70 to 85 decibels at listening position, depending on title and section).

As review moderator I worked to limit how our sonic memory can trick us and to free reviewers from cognitive dissonance. For example, reviewers were not asked to find a difference if they did not hear one. To eliminate confirmation bias – the tendency people have to embrace information that supports their beliefs and reject information that contradicts them – the reviewers never saw the ICs under evaluation and knew nothing about the manufacturers or the price points for each cable. We also discussed the psychology of sequence or order bias.

One reviewer per session, we listened to a title twice on the installed IC pairs to ensure familiarity with it. Then out of view I would change the IC sets and we would listen again to the same track. The next title began with the second installed IC set so that through the listening menu, the first and second IC set in evaluation switched. Each reviewer sat in the sweet spot where soundstage and imaging on the Spatial X2s were optimal. Reviewers listened to a minimum of three tracks, typically four and up to eight.

The Music

Music selected for the evaluation is widely recognized as being well produced and engineered. Included titles have great soundstage and imaging. Tracks were chosen that feature piano, women and men’s voices, both acoustic and electric guitar and bass, trumpet and saxophone, and a range of percussive instruments and drums. The list includes jazz, blues, folk and rock titles, a lineup with wide dynamic range. Some records are incredibly intricate and detailed and others featured a wall of sound.

The titles the team thought would give us a shot at hearing cable differences included:

1. Joni Mitchell, Court and Spark, from Court and Spark (1974, 1980), Asylum Records Nautilus Half-Speed Mastered Series U.S. pressing.
2. Stevie Ray Vaughan, Tin Pan Alley, from Couldn’t Stand The Weather (1984), Epic U.S. pressing.
3. Dire Straits, Telegraph Road, from Love Over Gold (1982), Warner Bros. U.S. pressing.
4. Kate Wolf, Here in California, from Gold In California (1986), Kaleidoscope Records U.S. pressing.
5. Bobby Hutcherson, Even Later, from Cirrus (1974), Blue Note U.S. pressing.
6. Art Blakey, When Love Is New, from Indestructible (1966, 2012), Blue Note Music Matters 45 RPM U.S. pressing.
7. Toto, Africa, from Toto IV (1982), Columbia Records U.S. pressing.
8. Steely Dan, Black Cow, from Aja (1977), ABC Records U.S. pressing.
9. Robert Plant | Alison Krauss, Rich Woman, from Raising Sand (2007), Rounder Records U.S. pressing.
10. Earth, Wind & Fire, That’s The Way Of The World, from That’s The Way Of The World (1975), Columbia Records U.S. pressing.

The first three listed titles were common to all reviewers.

A Common Language

We discussed how audio systems perform reproducing non-musical aspects of a studio recording. Reviewers had a sense for how instruments and voices sound live in terms of timbre, tonal color, melody, harmony, rhythm, tempo, and dynamics. These folks are audiophiles and/or musicians so they understood completely that recorded music played on a two-channel audio system has different parameters and attributes, while the goal of a good system is always toward realism in sound reproduction.

To ensure a common language for this evaluation we discussed attributes in recorded sound. This discussion drew heavily from Jeff Day’s superior three-part series in Positive Feedback (High Fidelity: Is hifi system voicing a matter of taste?, January 2019) dealing with audio system performance in relation to what live music really sounds like. We reviewed transparency as a catchall term for the ability to aurally ‘see’ into a recording, hear nuances, resolution and space. We covered resolution as specifically the level of presented detail. Then we dealt with soundstage for the dimensions of recorded space in width, height and depth; soundspace as the sense of space as heard in note decay and reverberation in the recording venue and in placement of microphones; and imaging as the ability to place instruments and musicians within the soundstage. We talked about resolution and imaging in terms of detail, clarity and a sense of presence.

We also discussed the commonly used attributes of detail and warmth as potential artifacts of cable design. Some ICs by materials and design may unwittingly or even intentionally trade definition and detail for a warmer and loose sound. Therein lies a core divide based on my experience to personal preference in sound reproduction. To understand why allow me to digress.

Technical Considerations (Where I Am Out Of My Depth)

A voltage drop and alternating electrical current (AC) in an IC conductor sets up a unique “orthogonal” configuration of magnetic and electrostatic fields surrounding it that actually carries the audio signal as an electromagnetic (EM) wave. Theory states, the signal carried by the EM wave travels ‘on’ a conductor in a vacuum (or in air) at a velocity just short of the speed of light. The EM wave depending on signal frequencies travels predominately on the surface of the conductor. That so called ‘skin effect’ is the tendency of high frequency current density to be highest at the conductor’s surface diminishing exponentially toward its core. In AC, an oscillating magnetic field around wire also induces a current in the opposite direction that increases resistance to propagation of the EM wave. Audio frequencies are relatively low in the energy spectrum so some experts argue that skin effects are minuscule on the signal, barely measurable. In fact, some experts commonly claim that all well-designed ICs will sound identical.

Now it gets more complex and from what I understand here is where the magic happens. In IC cables insulation of some form surrounds the conductor on which the EM wave travels. This insulator becomes polarized or charged by the applied electric field and imperfectly holds the charge. That boundary condition property is called a dielectric. A dielectric easily supports a charged field even though it is not itself a conductor of electricity. A vacuum or air as the insulator has a dielectric constant of 1.0 – perfect – while for plastics or Teflon it is higher (~3.4 to 2.1, respectively). The closer the dielectric constant is to 1.0 the closer the EM wave can travel toward the speed of light. Manufacturers have widely different approaches to conductor insulation.

The IC conductor may be exceptionally pure. Yet some folks posit that critically the integrity of the EM wave moving on the conductor surface has the potential to be influenced more by frequency dependent self-inductance and especially by the boundary with the insulator for any dielectric constant exceeding 1.0. Some folks suggest that a higher dielectric creates a small phase shift in the signal, depending on frequency. That phenomena, some argue, allows for minor frequency dispersion that smears or ever so slightly distorts a signal where EM wave frequencies have different speeds along the conductor-dielectric interface. Frequency smearing – a debated concept in audio cable applications – could lead to a warm sound that some listeners actually prefer.

Another design objective then for some cable manufacturers is getting a dielectric as close to a vacuum as possible to potentially create a cable with better resolution, detail and clarity. The closer the dielectric is to 1.0, the faster EM wave speed and lower potential frequency smearing. The AE Prestige IC has a low 1.3 dielectric. These technical issues were not discussed with reviewers. Yet its inclusion here is for the sake of argument on why cables may present differences in sonic character.

Evaluation Process

Reviewers were given a paper pad and a pen. They were instructed to relax, listen intently and to focus acutely on defining features, as discussed earlier, in music reproduction for each play of a title. We played the title once through before beginning the evaluation rounds. I asked them after each title set to summarize their impressions. If need be, we replayed a selection until they were comfortable they could comment. We then moved on to the next title, beginning with whatever IC was already installed. Reviewers were asked not to share those thoughts until the end of the review. They never knew which IC sets were involved until their evaluation was completed. They were told only that they were listening to Cable 1 or Cable 2.

After running through all titles for the listening session, I asked them to tabulate their findings and to critique each option. Then I asked them if they had a preference and if so, why. Once I secured their notes, I told them about the cables, about each manufacturer, and finally I told them the price to purchase a 3-foot or one meter IC pair of each.

Noted Differences

All reviewers noted differences in sound reproduction between the two evaluated IC options. All reviewers thought both sets of ICs sounded very good and remarkably close in overall performance, with different nuances in sound reproduction, depending on the music. The following major points summarize what reviewers heard in the Audio Envy Prestige IC (note, their 5th Generation) in comparison to the reference IC:

1. AE Prestige IC demonstrated phenomenal resolution across the entire frequency spectrum. Detail and clarity in this IC is simply superb. The word ‘decongest’ comes to mind, reviewers said the AE revealed better detail and clarity when the music was a wall of sound. For example, on the Dire Straits’ Telegraph Road from Love Over Gold, one reviewer commenting on the last five minutes of that cut said he had never heard how well guitarist Mark Knopfler played on that title. The clarity provided by the AE made his fretwork quite obvious. That is a terrific attribute.

2. On Bobby Hutcherson’s Even Later from his Cirrus record, the aural sense of soundspace from the vibraphone on the reference IC was astonishing. An encompassing tone seemed to hang in the air and took a bit longer to decay. On the AE, it was nearly as good, but did not hang for quite as long and was just shy of being as encompassing. The same effect was noted in guitar work by Stevie Ray Vaughn on early sections of Tin Pan Alley, from Couldn’t Stand The Weather. All but one reviewer said that performance on these titles were decidedly in favor of the reference IC.

3. Compared to the AE, the reference IC showed slightly stronger bass slam, to the point where two reviewers thought it colored the tone. One reviewer thought on one title the reference IC sounded boxy. Some people prefer louder bass and that favorably impacted two reviewers on several titles. These two reviewers thought the bass sounded a bit louder on the reference IC.

4. AE IC has an incredibly fine mid-range resolution and detailed high end. Maybe because of the bass effect on the reference IC, the AE sounded better balanced. One reviewer thought the AE IC was warmer, an attribute he strongly preferred.

5. Both ICs sounded quick. On one title, the reviewer asked me if I had even changed out the ICs. They sounded that similar on some titles.

6. Two reviewers noting differences preferred the AE ICs. A third reviewer preferred the reference IC overall but said he wished he could get a cable with the fine attributes of both options. Two other reviews were mixed on titles but preferred the reference IC. Again, just as in an earlier IC evaluation, I was dealing with a split in preference.

Then I told the five reviewers the price points for the ICs. The cost for the reference IC for a one-meter pair is $430. The AE Prestige is $150 for a 3-foot pair. All five reviewers said that if they were in the market for ICs, they would purchase the AE over the reference IC. One reviewer recently upgraded his entire system and he told me that he was going to outfit the entire system with Audio Envy cables. Another reviewer in his summary statement put it this way:

"How do you choose the best IC’s for your audio system?

When I’m buying a single pair of IC’s for a component and I want to try out something new, price is a close second to quality. The driving force in this search for me is toward ‘affordability’ and to find a better sounding cable, while minimizing the risk of ending up with a lighter wallet, and no appreciable change in sound quality.

After reviewing the two IC’s over a variety of music, I found that in most cases, my ears favored the more expensive cable. I say ‘most cases’ because there was one track that the ‘less expensive’ IC was the clear winner.

It is important to note that for me the differences were not in-your-face, but subtle. This is really important because if my plan is to replace all the IC’s in my system, my investment multiplies to the point where my only choice is to pick the lower costing IC. If a jump in performance was linked to the higher cost, I could justify the investment. But when the difference is subtle enough that a reasonable mind could assume the cables are about equal, the ‘affordable’ option is my only option.”

What this reviewer is talking about is value, where quality and price meet. As noted earlier in this review, I share that approach.

Conclusion

Let me get this out of the way first off. Audio Envy makes terrific products and I recommend their interconnects without reservation. This boutique company makes well thought out and constructed cables that happen to be a very good value. Based on my experience with AE ICs I purchased, a consumer would need to spend three times as much to find a cable that is only marginally “better” with better being a subjective and personal preference. I think so highly of Audio Envy products that I now use their RCA interconnects, power cables and speaker wire in my system. Further, Audio Envy perfected their 6th generation of interconnects and introduced those to the market earlier this year. This generation was modified based on customer feedback, such as in this review, for folks wanting a bit more bass slam. In a less formal setting, I A/B tested this cable against the 5th generation and the reference interconnects with a few prior reviewers. We agreed that the 6th generation completely closed the gap on the reference IC in bass response, while retaining that incredible mid-range resolution and a detailed high end. And this is why I recommend their interconnects without reservation.

Blind evaluations of interconnects I have conducted left no doubt to this former skeptic that audible – and sometimes significant – differences indeed exist. Further, cables may sound different, yet expensive cables do not always sound better. Based on my experiences, as the product price rises, differences in well-designed cables rapidly diminish. Results I’ve heard depend on the system, on the conductor and coatings – silver or copper, whether the conductor is stranded or solid core, on dielectric properties, shielding or not, whether the cables are system conditioned, and finally, on the listener in their room and with their music.

The search for what’s best is daunting too, given the shear number of options on the market today and the continuous evolution in offered models. Arguably, beyond a threshold price-quality value point, optimal is a subjective personal preference where one cannot necessarily expect price to indicate "better" sound reproduction. You really need to listen for yourself and that is what is so maddening about the search for “what’s best” in a crowded field with an unwieldy price range. I believe Audio Envy has found that sweet spot.

Little did I know when I walked into Seattle’s Bop Street Records that I was going to get upfront and personal with yet another manufacturer of audio cables. In that sojourn I got to know Audio Envy Prestige interconnects and enjoyed communicating with Captain Payne, the brain trust for the company. Then I discovered a remarkably good interconnect at a very attractive price point.

 

I just got the NV-SP7 speaker cables from Captain, and I'll just say that they're a game changer to the sound of my set-up. They are a bit too good to be true in regards to sound and price ratio. I can't wait to get his interconnects next. Little by little...

 

Here is a write up on Part Time Audiophile about Audio Envy cables. Audio Envy, possibly the most underrated cable in hi-fi | RMAF 2019 | Part-Time Audiophile.

 

Here is a new late December review of Audio Envy cables, in The Sound Advocate:

AUDIO ENVY CABLES REVIEWED • The Sound Advocate

I compared Grover Huffman's Empress in XLR with an XLR manufactured by Audio Envy. A written review is pending while I have asked a set of folks to compare blind 88.2kHz 24 Bit recording of the same set of titles on the two cables under identical recording conditions.

As a preview, the Audio Envy XLR has bettered its designs; they are simply sensational and one of the most competitive cables on the market with an astounding level of performance on my system.

 

If at first you don't succeed, bump, bump again.......

 

"AE treats these conductors with a very thin non-conductive coating to prevent signal robbing oxidization."

BS. See second paragraph.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ja01167a079

"Yet some folks posit....."

"Some folks suggest"

Scientists or audiophiles?

NOT saying that cable differences can not be heard by SOME folks on SOME systems. Just sayin.

 

So what's the verdict when compared to Grover Huffman's Empress? Next question is if it beats the express, what about Grover top model the Pharaoh?

 

My main listening and recording system is now 100% Audio Envy cables and speaker cable. Audio Envy modified the cable I reviewed six months or so after I initially posted the review. AE has been considering design changes, he read my review and had feedback from other audiophiles with phenomenal systems, and we talked about my goals. The newer AE generation cables – this was more than a year ago – improved on their earlier design in some way not known to me to address the areas where it did not match other high end cables, including the GH Empress. For that reason, I now use all AE cables.

I specifically removed XLR cables from between my Whest PS40.RTD SE phono preamp to a Tascam DA-3000 audio recorder for my vinyl-to-CD conversions. I then added in the last edition of AE RCAs, an improved Prestige. And actually, I returned the XLR to Audio Envy since I knew I would not longer use it. The improved AE RCA did better match gain control in the Tascam circuitry (compared to the XLR set up).

In those dubs, I was pleasantly surprised at the rich detail across the audio spectrum. The high end is not attenuated or too bright, its nicely detailed, fast and I think in my system balanced across the board. The bass is very solid. My dubs have moved up another degree. In the meantime, I had upgraded my phono cartridge from an Ortofon Cadenza Black to the Ortofon A95. I listen in detail with headphones on iZotopeRX9 software I employ for my dubs. I'm so delighted in that recording combination using the AE RCA that I have no desire to swap out gear.

I had intended to post a review of that AE cable I employed and perhaps this post will serve to do that. On AE website they say "accurate sound reproduction through signal transmission." That is how I hear it now in my dubs and in my two channel playback. Bottom line: with this latest AE I stopped looking to swap out cables. I did not get paid by Audio Envy, they did not give me equipment – I paid for it, and I have no relationship with the founder Captain Payne. In learned about the company through Record Collector magazine and reached out to them to see if they would be interested in having their cable A/B'd against what I was using, Grover Huffman's product.

Side note: I went through several upgrades of GH cables, EX and the Empress. After moving to the Empress, I wanted to perform an A/B test between the EX generation and the Empress. In my system, I heard precious little difference, which I shared nowhere. Yet I did the review with knowledge and approval of Grover Huffman. I performed an exhaustive review from a selection of carefully picked tracks of music from jazz to classical to rock to folk at precisely the same recording settings of both GH options. That review unfortunately has been removed from SHF as was an entire thread on GH cables after he introduced yet a newer generation cable called the Pharaoh. The bottom line on that comparison that included a dozen people selected for a blind test from this very forum was that most could not hear a meaningful difference and those who could – and there were some – turned out were 50/50 split on the two options. That is why I began to look for another reasonably priced RCA and XLR option to test. I was not in deep in the purse and simply unwilling to pay the increased price of Grover's latest cable design. I still have his cable in a second system.

GH makes a good product. Yet I've moved on after my own reviewing exercise and quite frankly I am satisfied enough to stop looking. Full circle, my main system is all Audio Envy cables.