Grover SX?

[shep]

I'm going to put my foot in my mouth  in the hopes I don't gag or have to go to the emergency ward later to have it removed. I try NOT to give into the impulse of first impressions...but.
I got them today and right out of the box, cold and new, they sound VERY good. This is the fourth version from G. I have had, so I think I can be a reliable witness. None of the previous sounded this good in the beginning. There is none of the typical hard and tight I associate with an unbroken-in cable. Right off it is obvious that imaging has improved and there is less subliminal grain than before. Having established that he has made an unmistakable improvement, I'm put the Isotek cd on repeat and leave it. I'm a little peeved that there is no direction indicated on the cable. On the previous version I found out that the arrow was in fact pointing the "wrong" way; i.e. it sounded better with the arrow pointing towards source. Other than that, it appears at first blush that Grover has vindicated himself. I have no idea if what I have is what you all heard and were not very impressed by. Given that I have spent well over 400$ on Grover's interconnects since the first group buy, I was beginning to loose patience. If things go as usual and after a good long burn in, they sound substantially better, I may well call it quits
and stay with this (unless the rascal yet again comes forth with yet another version...In which case I will blow a fuse). 

[Carlman]

At the last big meet at my place.. We tried the SX speaker cable, which I thought was a big improvement over previous speaker cables.  The IC's were 'SX' but Grover changed the dielectric directly after our meet.  I offered to compare the revised SX IC's and did not get a response..
Only Bigfish and Richidoo have heard the SX (I think)...

[shep]

I was fully prepared to be disappointed or have a ho hum reaction but I am impressed. Whatever he changed, it is major. I don't want anyone to rush out and get these on my say so. As we all know to our cost, the big unfathomable mystery is synergy and there is absolutely no way to anticipate or control it.
None the less, my system is sufficiently revealing and my hearing still good enough to hear immediate and
self-evident differences between this and everything he's done before. There's still a house sound, which tends towards the cool and analytical side of the spectrum. None of his cables could remotely be called sweet and warm. What I'm hearing is a definite rounding off of the leading edge, without losing attack and definition. I'm hearing a much lowered noise floor, less grain, which makes the acoustic space more palpable and "quieter". I'm getting a much improved sense of individual instruments with specifics: brass sounds more like brass, wood like wood etc. Everything is more tangible and there's music being played rather than hi-fi imitation. I found all of Grovers cables, excepting perhaps the first white one, to be a bit brazen and hard to listen to for very long without getting tired. I was attributing this to either my speakers or the CDP, but it appears to have been related to the iC's. For the moment I'm going to attribute the improvement to a dramatically quieter and less grainy rendering. I don't hear any dramatic improvement to any specific part of the audio spectrum. The sound stage is pretty much as it was but because of the reduction in "noise", everything is happening in a much more realistic and definable space.
All of this is very surprising on an un-run-in cable!
I certainly look forward to the impressions of others and hope they have the same version 

[mdconnelly]

I recently received a pair of Sx RCA ICs from Grover as well.  I have to caveat my comments first with the fact that I normally use a pair of Grover 'SC.' XLR ICs between preamp and amp so comparing XLR ICs to the RCAs is probably not an ideal comparison.

After inserting the Sx RCA ICs and giving them a couple days break in revealed a cable that seems a bit of a departure from Grover's house sound.  While still far from being warm and cuddly, I will say that the edge has been tamed.  I've only spent one evening critically listening so far, but overall, I tend to agree with some of Shep's comments.  They are more relaxed and quieter than the SC. cables making it easier to simply relax and listen to the music.  But, I will say that I found myself missing some of the detail and definition that Grover's ICs have always been known for.  To be honest, I have not had nearly enough time with the Sx to say anything more than brief observation, but when I swapped back in the 'SC.' XLRs, I heard a more open and dimensional soundstage with a better sense of venue and harmonic decay.  More articulation, less veil, but then I also heard the return of the 'Grover edge' on some recordings.  Everything is a trade-off and I'll certainly spend more time with the Sx breaking in to see if it changes further.

As always, Grover's ICs continue to be a very good cable and excellent pricing.  The new Sx is probably the biggest departure from the numerous Grover upgrades I've had (I think the SX is my 4th).  If you use ICs as tone controls, I could easily see how both the 'SC' series and the 'SX' series could be good fits for different challenges.  But as others have said, it's all about synergy. 

[mdconnelly]

Hmmm... I should add to my last post (wonder why it won't let me modify it anymore?)....

In my system, balanced XLR ICs have generally always sounded better than their RCA counterparts, so I'm not at all surprised that the SC. XLR ICs sounded better than the SX RCAs.   At some point after the SX have fully broken in, I will compare the RCA SX to the RCA SC. on my vinyl rig to see how these two compare there.

[richidoo]

We only compared the SX to SC. and SC3. We only had a short time, and it was not intended to be a public audition. So we zipped through the lot, heard the differences, made a purchase choice and that was that. We did not make fine judgments about SC. / SX differences.

[HumanMedia]

Thanks for starting a dedicated thread as much of the SX info was getting lost in the "Grover ICs vs Reality ICs" thread.

My 2 meter XLR SX interconnect is still burning in.  Just last night it seems to have hit another milestone in burn-in change but I will give it a few more days.

(As an aside I think a big part of 'burn-in' is not just having current flowing through it but having physical relaxation time in the place/orientation/configuration you put it.  It seems to have part of its change physically taking on the new shape its in when plugged into equipment,  while not even being used with a signal)

Will report back in just a few more days.

[mdconnelly]

HumanMedia, what has been your experience with breakin time on the Grover ICs?  While Grover feels 40 hours gets you pretty much there, I tend to think it's longer than that.  But then, it may also simply be that it takes my ears longer than that to begin to discern the subtle changes and improvements. 

[HumanMedia]

Always a bare minimum of 300 hours for me.

But i always wonder how much of that is the Neutrik XLRs used on the balanced versions. 

HumanMedia, what has been your experience with breakin time on the Grover ICs?  While Grover feels 40 hours gets you pretty much there, I tend to think it's longer than that.  But then, it may also simply be that it takes my ears longer than that to begin to discern the subtle changes and improvements. 

[shep]

I would concur with a long break-in time. Today, after some 12 hours, it sounded pretty rough. One step forward and two back. I hope this is not psychological! Grover told me to experiment with directionality...thanks a lot...there's a dif. but I can't quantify it. Maybe later.

[djbnh]

I would concur with a long break-in time. Today, after some 12 hours, it sounded pretty rough. One step forward and two back. I hope this is not psychological! Grover told me to experiment with directionality...thanks a lot...there's a dif. but I can't quantify it. Maybe later.

With my iterations of Grover ICs (I do NOT have the latest), using the Isotek CD mentioned by Shep in an earlier post was of much benefit to speed things along.

[rollo]

I would concur with a long break-in time. Today, after some 12 hours, it sounded pretty rough. One step forward and two back. I hope this is not psychological! Grover told me to experiment with directionality...thanks a lot...there's a dif. but I can't quantify it. Maybe later.

  Shep wire IS NOT directional unless a grounding scheme makes it so.  If the midrange sounded good from the start chances are the cable will come around after break in.
   My break in experience has taught me that the top comes around first followed by midrange then the bass and soundstage come together. Be patient. BTW its NOT the conductor that needs the time as much as the dielectric settling in.
  Speaking of break in I am of the opinion that cables that cost serious money should be broken in at the factory. A cable cooker should be owned by all the manfs. Then the brain is out of the picture [ break in] and the cable is the only deciding factor. For me 200 Hrs minimum has always done the trick. A shame when using tubed gear. Have fun.


charles

[shep]

Wires or dialectic...whatever...how come manufacturers put directional arrows on their cables? I always assumed wire had a direction: the one it was drawn in. Having said that, it's very unlikely that those who fabricate the raw stock, be it gold silver or moon dust, bother to mark on the reel which direction. I'll leave this topic to brighter minds and get back to Grover's interconnects. At around the 12 hour mark things took a turn for the worse and for the next ten hours or so they sounded veiled and hard and un-listenable. I even wrote G; asking if I could have damaged the connections (they are a bitch to get on and off). Now they are sounding a lot better, although not as good as at first. I ass ure you I am not imagining any of this. Of course it's possible that there was something going on with the power grid; under-volatge is not uncommon here.

[richidoo]

Grover wires always have big fluctuations during break in. He recommends 50 hours. Curious that you guys hear big changes far past that point. 

In a simple IC or SC where the ground is connected to negative terminals at both ends, there is no reason for directionality. It was a gimmick to sell more wires back in the 70s. Audio signals are AC, current moves equally forward and reverse with no preference.  With a grounding scheme that is connected to negative at only one end and floats at the other end, then the direction may have a real effect. But the best direction for your unique system still may be opposite of the designer's intention.

The IC connectors feel kinda fragile when they twist against the wire. But I used to swap sources with wires and they never failed with all that plugging.

[HumanMedia]

Isn't line-level (interconnects) DC and speaker cables AC?