Why don't gold based cable fans try Synergistic

I am looking to try new cables and have been reading the archives in cable forums on all the great cable recommendations. I'm trying to get a handle on how the Synergistic Tesla range that I once owned compare to the gold based cable offerings.

However for some strange reason hardly any of the members here who seem to have tried the various gold based faves (Gabriel Gold, Jade, KCI, Purist and others) have not been tempted to try the popular Synergistic cables and not much here in the way of comparisons. I am not sure why but there seems to be two camps.

Anyways hoping to get a comparison as I had the Tesla Accelerators in my system for a short while and wonder if the gold based cables have the same naturalness, depth of soundstage, air and separation of the Teslas. I should add that as good as the Accelerators were sound wise I did not like the idea of introducing more electricity into my system with the active shielding hence looking for comparable alternatives.
I owned the Tesla Accelerator interconnects, but found they did little for me in terms of providing a relaxed presentation. I burned them in for about 200 hours on my Frykleaner Pro and I spent a good deal of time listening to them in my system. They were certainly detailed, but ultimately unfulfilling. Otherwise, I've auditioned a pretty fair number of other wires, but none of the gold based ones. After a considerable amount of reading as well as the exchange of e-mails with others, I've decided to try the route of some of those gold based cables. I'm ready for something that goes beyond the descriptive terminology of incredibly vivid,sharply defined and "miles" of soundstage depth---something that contributes to a deeper,more satisfying level of relaxed enjoyment.While there's no guarantee,it would be nice if one of the gold based cables helped take me where I'm looking/listening to go.
I LOVE the SR Tesla active range and have no issue with Active cables- uncompromised natualness, air, and sound stageing. I started with Accelerators but landed on Apex and Precision Reference. That said SR has a gold based intercnnect- AU79. You can also try Magnetic TrIcon or mix and match. Neither are Active.

I'd like to know what you and others think as I am going to cable my office system soon.
I found the new Tesla Series lacking.

Lacking sufficient value and performance accordingly. tried the Accelerators and then the Acoustic Refs and came to my senses thereafter. I felt if within two steps of the top model I couldn't be satisfied, forget it. Also with the inherent need to cable my system throughout with Tesla models, they priced me out of that game.

I've used SR for a long time now but the Teslas promise of performance costs too much for what they give. Way too much.
Hopefully within the next number of weeks I plan on trying my first gold based interconnect. I'm thinking of Gabriel Gold Rapture as the price seems somewhat lower than some others.

I have not changed equipment since I had the Accelerators but obviously this won't be an easy comparison since I no longer have the Accelerators. I'll be curious if the Raptures can bring something special to the table like the Teslas did. As mentioned there really was something unique about the soundstage depth portrayal as well as extra air but the general tone was not much different than my cheaper and conventional (non-active) Discovery sig interconnects.

So, I'm hoping the gold based cable will bring more to the table than just a different hue (which actually I wouldn't mind just for something different as I'm bored with the sound of my current set up)and also have some other special qualities.

Shellie I really did not consider the lower range Teslas and maybe should take a look at their offerings.
Frank: I agree with Blindjim, but also think you touched on something else that coincides with my impression when you said"...the general tone was not much different than my cheaper and conventional...interconnects." Speaking from my own perceptive vantage point, I'm not especially enamored with a kind of sound that seems to emphasize how clean, clear and neutral it is, but I respect the right of others to feel differently.
I tried the SR Apex and Precision Ref ICs in my system and they didn't work for me. I was really hopeful that the SR interconnects would significantly better my current ICs, but unfortunately that wasn't the case. My Audio Metallurgy ICs were as good or better in almost every respect.

With the SR cables the music was delivered from a blacker background and the mid-bass was better, but in all other respects the AM cables were their equal or better. Plus the AM ICs were simply more involving, IMHO.

Next up will be Indras from DAC to preamp and Valhalla from preamp to amp. Hopefully, this attempt will be more fruitful.
Why don't gold based cable fans try Synergistic

Because we are happy with gold. I have tried many, many cables, far to many to start naming names in the last 20 years or so. I even heard some SR cables years ago when they first came out, and was unimpressed. I realize that SR has become much more popular with the Tesla Series, but I discovered gold based conductors 2-3 years ago, and have no interest in playing the cable game anymore.

I'm with Jmcgrogan2 all the way.

I have a great respect for SR, but after exhausting many interconnect trials,
I went for Gold and never turned back.
I'm very happy with my Jade Hybrids. No need or desire to change unless I want to downgrade.

Soooo.... just as long as the cables have gold overlay or termination that's all one needs? Or are all the 'gold' not in California, alike?

Well, for the uninitiated, who makes these Gold wires and about what do they cost? Also, does it matter if the rest of the system is not so associated? Are they best suited to source cables or mains?

Sorry but I'm curious now, but don't want to get into a whole hog affair and make major moves in order to 'step up'? performance.

I'm considering replacing my HT Magic IIs which are main ics now. Been thinking about doing another MIT Magnum 2 or 1 but use it as source and move the Nirvana Sx Ltd into the preamp to amps (main) spot.
I guess I will just have to find out for myself about the virtues of gold in cables through experimentation.

Unfortunately I realized since my earlier post the planned GG Raptures even at the used price of 1K might be over my budget and will consider the Silkworms at more or less half the price used to see how I like it (obviously one can not generalize with one cable and if it does not work out I probably should try atleast one other gold based cable to get an idea of how gold cable sounds).

There are: 1. gold cables 2. gold alloy cables 3. cables plated with gold, so technically there should be several different discussions if we want to compare apples to apples.

The Gabriel Raptures (which I have tried and like very much) fall into categories 2&3.

Gold plated cables can be alloy, silver, copper or some other metal. Thought it wise to point this out only to clarify the discussion.

BTW: There may be other configurations I haven't thought of.
I just found this thread. I might offer my experiences. My first solid gold interconnect was the Stealth PGS. I grew tire of the softness of gold and ultimately jumped to the Indras. What struck me with them other than that they did not sound at all like gold, is how encompassing they were. At various times during this period I tried palladium interconnects and just hated them. It might be that palladium like gold will not oxidize but they have a "sound" that I just find anathema to music. Next I tried non-metal interconnects from Cerious Technology and really did like the lack of "metal splash" with them. Then I heard of Jades.

I visit JD in his home an auditioned the Golds versus the Vermeil. I think the Vermeils are really gold plated. I was glad that I did because again I heard the gold and much preferred the Vermeils. Shortly thereafter the Hybrids were made with a "blend" of gold and silver. I bought only one pair of them and did prefer them between the dac and my line stage. I retained Vermeils elsewhere and later bought the Jade speaker wires.

I had heard demonstrations of the SRs stuff at CES and was impressed but never bought into the line. Then came the '08 RMAF and a very convincing demonstration of the new Tesla line as well as the ARTs for room resonance. I bought the ARTs at the show. On reflection of what I heard, I tried their PowerCell, then more pcs, and ultimately I reviewed a fully charged system, including pcs, ics, and speaker wires. These were mainly Apexs, Hologram A & Ds, and the PowerCell 10SE.

I must say that I have had a immense improvement in my sound with these and really think the "quantum tunneling" is a major contribution to their sound. I actually had Home Depot cheaters zapped and compared them to those just from the store. You would not believe what benefit there was from being zapped.

I don't hear any coloration in the SR line, and really don't know what metal is used, but I would guess silver. I will never go back to uncharged ics or speaker cables.

I have heard much more expensive ics, costing many times what the Apex cables do, and much prefer the Apexs.

Given my experiences, I will never try gold ics again.

As always, YMMV.
Frank, Silkworms are selling at a good discount because the Silkworm + is now out from KCI.

Jim, here are just a few manufacturers who have some form of gold in the conductors. The difference in price has a lot to do with how much gold is in the cable. (In no particular order).

Gabriel Gold
Black Mountain
Analysis Plus
Audio Metallurgy
Grant Fidelity

These are all that I can think of at this time. Remember, just because a cable says Gold or Golden on it, does not mean it uses gold in the conductors (eg: Tara Labs Zero Gold and Wireworld Gold Eclipse 6 have no gold in the conductors).

You can add the Synergistic Research Au79 to your list of gold IC's.

The SR Au79 are non-active and not too expensive. I am thinking of auditioning them in my office system.

Thanks John... it appears from where I'm already at a quite substantial investment will be required here... if this gold approach is truly something more akin to my own ear, yet prevails to infuse more naturalness. I see natural or organic as what I strive for while not sacrificing dynamics or having the sound become overtly resolute and clinical. I believe music does possess an inner 'color' or 'glow' which I do not wish to attenuate merely for greater ambience retrevial or resolution.

I think we all know or should know by now, it's that line between musical involvment and simple strident recreations which leave out nothing and thus become distracting and clinical.

Think I'm gonna begin with speaker cables first as I'm going to move my power line into the listening room following relocating some of my dedicated ckts.
Blindjim, you mentioned that someone would inherently need to use SR throughout their system. Why is this so? I've been looking into SR and wondering if the active shield would cause interference in adjacent cables that aren't well shielded. Is this what you're talking about?
Bigamp, I do use SR shielding throughout. Remember that the shielding is dc.I don't know how they would interfere with other cables. I did early on use the SR ics with other cables and noticed no problems. I also used for a while with other speakerwires. Again with no problems. As Ted Denney said once you have heard how quiet and dynamic a shielded system is, you don't want to be without it.

The one thing I don't like is all the blue leds. My room looks like a moonscape at night.
Tbg... I talked with Elliot about the LEDs.... he wraps them with electrical tape...and that's what I've done. Works great.

Most of the SR cables are silver....
Actually, I did and was told to do so.
Bigamp, I use the SR Magnetic Tricon ICs through out my system and they are not shielded and all SR power cords which are shielded and I notice no negative effect on the interconnects.
If I may add a couple of comments, without straying towards promotion of our cables. Apologies if I don't get that balance right.

A single set of LCR figures for a cable does not fully describe a cable. This is heresy to many EEs, but when the current scientific theory, which is an abstraction of reality, fails to describe what we experience, then we need new theories, and we need to test them. One of the theories we have been working on (together with experts in Physical Chemistry) is that a metal will possess a small amount of mechanical resonance that relates to the physical characteristics of its atomic structure. And that this mechanical resonance can impart a tiny electrical resonance when it carries an AC signal. This tiny electrical resonance can cause a persistent phase shift that creates a sonic signature. Null tests will show differences between cables, but they are in the noise floor and so very hard to isolate and identify, so if the theory has any validity you have to also believe that the ear/brain is very highly susceptible to phase anomalies that the ear/brain does not commonly encounter, and this creates fatigue for the ear/brain system. It is also possible that some people are a lot more susceptible to these anomalies than others.

Call it bollocks if you like, and it very well might be, like many an untested theory, but it is a theory that fits our experiences and we are working on how to measure and verify this.

We think that this can possibly explain why there is a pattern to how people describe their reactions to copper, or silver, or gold , or platinum, etc wires. And, without getting side-tracked, it also relates to why we think burn in has an audible effect - but that is another subject.

On the topic of this thread, copper seems to have a resonance in the lower mids and upper bass, and pick up noise easily (the latter, we think due to the small mass and density of the copper atom). Silver seems to have a resonance in the upper midrange and lower treble, and pick up less noise. Gold appears to have a very broad-based resonance centered on the mid midrange and pick up less noise than silver. We have been modelling atomic characteristics of these atoms to see if we can find a potential causal relationship with these observations, but funding for this research is slight.

Certain alloys of these or other metals can counteract these resonances, but also can create their own. The development of alloys that sound good is quite an art - that one or two appear to have mastered to some degree. But most alloys we have listened to smooth the resonance nicely over a wide range but the resonance is still there and tends to obscure detail. An alternative approach is to use solid wires of different gauges and metals. Another alternative approach is to coat one metal with another, or sometimes with more than one other metal.

Getting more specific about gold - using solid gold wires can result in dense tonal colours and warm harmonic balance without obscuring detail, and to my knowledge there is no other way to get this to quite the same degree except by using solid gold wires somewhere in the mix.

Other aspects of the design of a cable are of course incredibly important too, and so it is as easy to make a gold cable sound too 'gold' as it is to make a silver cable sound too 'silver'. The wire material is just an ingredient and using gold does not guarantee a great cable any more than it guarantees and overly soft sounding cable.

All this is just my feeble theorising of what I think I hear, and just my opinion of course. One day, our experimentation in this area may bear fruit.
The bottom line is if you can A/B/C it with statisticaly reproduced results...then it's true. The nice thing about doing this is that you can prove ONLY to yourself (you can lead a horse to water...but) that there is no subconcsious bias involved in trying out new cables. I have tried many different cable designs, in this A/B/C fashion, and only one cable has uniquely presented itself with a profound, consistent signature. These are in my system presently. All 32 pairs (8 XLR, 4 RCA, 4 XLR-RCA). Altogether, they cost me less than the cost of one of my components.
Hi Vandermeulen. I don't doubt your findings, but would like to make some observations about blind testing. Again this is only my opinion so please don't roast me for it.

The sound that arrives at our ear, is not the same as the sound our brain perceives, but not all of that difference is just psychological. Some of the difference is due to the processing that our brain does, to make sense of what it hears. In most acoustical environments the ear is bombarded by many reflections of any sound, and yet the brain often perceives the sound as a single arrival. The brain decides what to hear and what not to hear. The brain also decodes the direction and distance of the sound, and imagines the thing that is making the sound. The human ear/brain seems very highly adept at this work.

Many non-audiophiles can't relate to our hobby and one of the differences is that audiophiles seek to fully engage with the sound coming from their stereos. Non-audiophiles play music while they do something else. I theorise that non-audiophiles learn to do that because engaging with their generally poor stereos is not terribly pleasant for any length of time. I theorise that this is because the brain gets easily fatigued, or at least distracted from really enjoying the music, when listening to a poor stereo. Whereas, for an audiophile with a good system, it is possible to sit down for an extended period and enjoy an illusion of the actual performance. This relates back to my previous paragraph about how the ear/brain does work to make sense of what it hears. But the sound, in the first place, has to be good enough to be capable of being made sense of.

I believe that most blind testing of audio cables is inappropriate for the problem. The differences between cables, as stated in my earlier post, are mainly due to small phase problems. Now the brain is very good at making sense of phase issues - such as the direction and distance of a sound - but this is only possible if the brain has a reference. For example, by having experience of what a voice sounds like when it is 10 feet away and when it is 30 feet away (verified by sight), the brain can pick roughly how far away a voice is when unsighted.

On top of this, I believe that the more actively we listen, the more our brains work to make sense of what we hear. Which also relates to why non-audiophiles tend to listen passively to their poor stereos.

Therefore, in my opinion, a typical ABX or other blind test of a cable will usually cause the brain to be actively trying to make the cables sound the same, not different. Do you follow my logic?

Therefore, in our cable business, the development of a cable is a very lengthy process. We do use blind testing, but not in the way that blind testing is usually used. I tend to listen to a new cable, almost casually, for a period of days. This is more easily done at home than on our reference system at the factory. After I have listened to something for that kind of period, I develop impressions of the character of the cable. I often get distinct impressions that PRAT is better or worse, naturalness of timbre is better or worse. I then listen to the cable more intensely on our reference system to try and pin down the tell-tale traits. At this stage I have some clues as to what I am listening for and so I may be tricking my brain to hear what isn't there, but it hopefully avoids the brain glossing over what is there in order to make it appear to be real. Once I have developed a clear theory of the sound of the cable (compared to a reference of some kind - another cable), then, and only then, do I do blind tests. In the blind tests I am attempting to distinguish between the subject cable and a reference, based on my theories about what the subject cable does right and/or wrong. If I can reliably pick it in the blind tests then I treat my theory on the cable as right. If I can't reliably pick it, then I know I was deluding myself - this happens.

So, I believe that short term blind tests of unfamiliar cables in an unfamiliar system are a waste of time. Gaining experience with a cable gives you an idea of what to listen for in a blind test to distinguish it. This takes time.

Now some people, at this point, even if they accept what I have said above, will wonder whether cable differences are important if it takes so much effort to distinguish a difference. My answer to that is that it is up to you to decide for your self. But, I do believe that persistent small phase errors that the brain cannot decode get in the way of us enjoying our music, and over a period of time become irritating.

I didn't get into the cable business because I wanted to have a business. I got into it because I became very aware of how different cabling made significant differences to the sound of my stereo, and I found it impossible to find a cable that didn't impose a coloured lens on the sound. I tried so many cables before deciding it might be cheaper to learn how to tweak a cable's design to get it right, than continue the 'lucky dip' that wasn't working for me. When I got to a design that performed well and that I knew backwards how to tweak for almost any desired sound characteristics, I stopped buying anyone else's cables.

So, Vandermeulen, I found that the subtle differences between cables were musically significant, but acknowledge that this can be hard or even impossible to pick up in some blind testing. I realise some will accuse me of posting this with some bias, but hope my rambling post made some sense.
"So, I believe that short term blind tests of unfamiliar cables in an unfamiliar system are a waste of time."

I couldn't agree more. IMO: Blind tests of cables are only significant over an extended period of time in a familiar system. There's just too many variables involved otherwise.
Antipodes...could you tell your cable from another in a blind test on a completely different system you have never heard before?
It might be very difficult if one went into the blind testing straight away. I can usually pick up the key characteristics of a system within three tracks, if the tracks are familiar, and so after that, if I knew both cables, and so what I was listening for, I would probably get better than 80%. It would be really really hard if I wasn't familiar with the characteristics of one of the cables.

See, I CAN make a short post.
80%? Remarkable feet.
Vandermeulen, You did not list your system. Please do so.

It sounds to me that you have way too many cables for a simple high quality high end system. I dont see how you could tell anything!
Remember, cables can only subtract from your components potential. Keep it simple.

I have found that as my system components improved, the differences in cables and other changes become more obvious.
Ozzy, I can assure you that my systems can resolve even a flea fart. Primary system includes Wyetech Opal, Origin Live Resolution w/Illustrious arm, zyx airy 3, Gamut D200 MRK II, Theil 2.4, and ASR Basis Excl. Secondary system inlcudes Audible Illusions L2, MAC 2500's, Yamaha PL-90 DD TT with ceramic tonearm and VDH Calibri, JLTI phono pre, JBL 4312C, Jolida 100CDP. Tertiary system includes Roland Concerto pre, Rowland 201's, MMG's, Denon Pro CDR, B&O 6004 with MM1 cartrige, and Einstein phono pre. Quadrary system includes all DIY projects of mine, F5 clone, aleph pre, single driver low watt speakers, Consonance droplet cdp. Fifth system has all DIY tube components. As I stated in another post...I cant for the life of me get rid of anything that comes through the door. I have swapped places of every one of these components in all ways imaginable. Trust me, I know cables. (thats about it thought LOL.) Also, my father's system (which I like to think is really mine) consists of PASS X250.5, VS Vr4sr, Hovland HP200, esoteric CDP. Those components have also made it into my swaray. Forget about all the previous components he had prior to these.
Vandermeulen, Farting fleas is not the quality sound you should be trying to obtain.

Sorry, I don’t recognize most of your Components so I can’t comment on there sound quality. Besides, if it sounds good to you that's all that matters.

But, when you make such general statements about cables it shows you either have not progressed in the search for higher sound quality or you have accepted a lower level of quality for whatever the reason.

I too know cables. I have had many, many complete systems of cables. Please read some of my past postings to see just how many. I even owned an AudioDharma Cable Cooker.

I have come to the conclusion that cables can make or break a system. Those cables should be as high of quality as the components that they are attached to. I wasnt kidding when I stated that cables can only subtract from the components sound quality. The best match does the less harm. It is some trial and error to find that "right" cable, but, you can obtain help from fellow Audiogonners to narrow the search.

If you stick with this you should be able to tell the differences in cables. (if your system is up to the task).
I also own the Audiodharma Ozzy. And the Manley skipjack.
What some folks fail to realize is that cable burn-in is not just strictly dependent on reaching conductor vs. dielectric entropy. Burn-in MAINLY facilitates annealing between the crystalline structures of the metal. What this means is this (this is going to be HEAVY so prepare yourself) IF YOU DISCONNECT THE ALREADY BURNED-IN CABLE FROM YOUR SYSTEM, YOU HAVE JUST ELIMINATED THE BURNED-IN ADVANTAGE FROM THE CABLE! Any bending of the cable in any way will remove the tight bonding between the crystals. You would have to burn-in again. And yes, you guessed it, that means you can’t do it on the cooker THEN remove the cable again. DIELECTRIC SYNERGY IS NOT AFFECTED THIS WAY. Once dielectric absorption has become stable, its good to go (for the most part...I'm not getting into this right now.) Ozzy, you have made some suggestions to me, allow me to make some to you. Familiarize yourself with my components. This should give you an idea of their resolving capabilities. Then, read up on the Skipjack. Afterwards, look up annealing on WIKI...and make sure to locate the correct definition. You could also read a little on entropy theory. But, it’s very confusing. It basically means the potential state of system, when the statistical factors of order vs. disorder are calculated. I forgot to mention that I am also a musician. Not professionally, but by choice. I was trained in Classical piano, but took up guitar and drums for fun. Guitar...not so much (imitating BORAT), drums...WATCH OUT VINNIE COLAIUTA!
Vandermeulen, Good luck, I have said all I wanted to say.
I am sure your system sounds good.
The privilege is all mine Ozzy.
I'm currently using Gabriel Gold Raptures between my preamp and amp. Before that, I was using Synergistic's Precision Reference. Both are excellent cables, but they performed differently in my system.

The Synergistic cables were wonderfully detailed, dynamic, and quiet. But in my system, they were a little harmonically thin. So I tried the Gabriel Gold Revelation Mk1's as an experiment. Harmonic thinness gone, but so was some of the detail and dynamics of the Synergistic cables. So I upgraded from the GG Revelations to the GG Raptures. That achieved the right balance of attributes in my system.

No, the GG Raptures are not quite as detailed, dynamic, or quiet as the Synergistic Precision Reference, but they are pretty close, and the harmonics are fuller and more natural in my system. Hope that helps!
Thanks for the comparison. I also found that in my system there was a general neutral tone of the Accelerators. Some say lack of tone change is a good thing. For me I actually don't mind adding just a little something between the DAC and preamp hence my curiousity with gold (and this is even using a non-os tube based DAC).

Having said that as I mentioned previously when I had the Accelerators I really enjoyed the the naturalness conveyed, air between instruments and the freaky depth portrayal. So, still wondering if any of the gold based cables can equal the SR Teslas in these areas or is their main attribute more focused on providing a "golden glow".
Frankk, I have only experienced one "golden glow". The one pictured over the Lord's head.
Frankk - To my ears, the GG Raptures don't have a "golden glow." Perhaps the GG Revelation Mk1's that I used briefly could be described that way, but the Raptures sound quite transparent to me. Good luck.
If the Raptures were a little less money then I would give them a try. Unfortunately they are in the same price range as the SR.

I do like the harmonic richness aspect that I also found to be lacking in the SR.Any other suggestions for IC's below $600 used that add a litlle of this harmonic richness along with a big soundstage (I hate cables that diminish soundstage)?
I have to say that this is an interesting thread and, this was great; "Ozzy, I can assure you that my systems can resolve even a flea fart." Ya gotta love audio!

Frankk - I certainly understand your hesitation to sink a bunch of money into a cable without being very confident that it's going to work in your system. I have done that, only to be disappointed. For what it's worth, I believe a used pair of GG Revelation MKii's would be in the price range you're looking for. I have not heard them personally, but the folks over on the GG thread describe them as having a strong family resemblance to the Raptures.

As far as other suggestions, I'm afraid I can't be of much help. My experiences are limited, and I have always found choosing cables difficult and a little frustrating. I have read good reviews of some of the Audio Metallurgy gold cables, which are in the price range you mentioned, but I have no first hand experience with them.
No cable in my experience has the sound stage of Active SR cables. All other cables compress the imaging in my experience. I would have stuck with the Accelerators and added one of thier T3 power cords to warm up my system- that's how the Tesla system works. Depending on what you are looking for SR has a combo of Tesla cables that will deliver. Theirs is a system approach to cable / system matching with different cables and power cords to create a desired outcome.

At this point and given the fact you've taken a hit when you sold your Accelerators, and given your budget, why don't you try a used pair of SR Designers Reference X2 interconnects. They are on the warm/bass heavy side and they're Active so they are holographic. Just a thought.
Well I must agree that the SR Accelerator I owned did have the rare ability to sound natural and yet expand the soundstage. The other few cables and power cords that I have tried which were what I would describe as natural sounding, I also found their biggest downfall was the soundstage got smaller.

I don't know if it is just a case of some cables just choking off part of the upper mid/high frequency spectrum which contributes to a more ear friendly experience but at the same time a smaller soundstage.

I would be interested in how SR pulls it off and if the other so called "natural" sounding cables (Kubala, Jade, Gabriel Gold, Purist, and others) are able to get around this hand in hand weakness.
SR makes a warm ballance IC and SC. It's called Acoustic Reference. You could have thrown in a pair of Acoustic SC's with your Accelerators and whaala, instant warmth WITH a holographic sound stage.

As I said, the Synergistic Tesla Series allows for great flexibility by design.
One way you guys can have the active sheilding and the gold is to use gold hook-up wire in your components, and the SR cables between the components.

It doesn't take much gold to get the sound qualities of gold.

Also interesting is there are a couple of speaker manufacturers that use the Active Sheilding inside the speakers.
Rilbr, I agree that it does not take much gold to make it evident. We disagree, I suspect, if this is good or bad.
Interesting read! I have Gabriel Gold, tried the Revelation and the Rapture, as well as the new Reflection and Rapture R. I have in the past tried SR and really liked it, however.....the active shielding charged my whole room with static! In fact I ended up shorting out my Processor when I touched the stand and had to send it away to get repaired. I don't know why this was, and at the time I did not put it all together, but then I took it out of the system and no static! Put it back in to be sure, and......static! It was not a subtle amount of static, you could feel the charge anywhere in the room, so, I have no choice but to not use cables with active shielding.

It should be said that I do live in a very dry climate where static is somewhat of a problem to start with, and perhaps I had a cable with an issue, but the fellow I sold it to has had no issue, living in Vancouver might be why! Not exactly a dry climate there!!
Bullot, did you ask the people at Synergistic Research about this? I have had no problem with this in NM where it is also quite dry.
I talked to the dealer I purchased the cable from, he had never heard of it. Another deal whom I had no affiliation whatsoever, said he has heard of such annomolies. I am in Alberta Canada, and when it gets to be -30c or -40c and the furnace is running all the time, it gets pretty dry. Your skin flakes if you don't use moisturizer, lips dry out, etc. Don't want to get into a "who's area is dryer" conversation.......I guess I didn't give it much more of a chance......nobody could pinpoint why it happened and I didn't want to take anymore chances with expensive equipment. Just my experience! It's really too bad, because I loved the cable! (Digital cable)
Maybe you should try some type of humidifier?