Kimber Kable PBJ Interconnect Cables
Kimber Kable PBJ Interconnect Cables
[May 27, 1998]
G. Edward Wensuc
an Audiophile
Jimmy, |
[May 27, 1998]
Jeffrey Morgan
an Audio Enthusiast
You know what happens when you bite a lemon? That's what happens to my ears when I pause the music using these cables. With a "darker" mellower system, however, these could really help as they do have excellent resolution and a tight controlled bass. Watch out for the treble that "bites" though. |
[Jun 23, 1998]
Austin
an Audiophile
Too bright and exaggerated treble to call this a true high-end cable. When compared to some of my interconnects costing $135 to $300, the soundstaging of the PJB is markedly limited, lending to some congestion. Some of the strengths of this cable are macro- and micro-dynamics, as well as detail, but this level is can be found in cables that I have costing $200 more. When I choose to upgrade my cables, I agonized over my choices, listening to over 7 different makes. The PBJ is a great cable for the price, however, I feel that they fall short when compared to higher quality cables. There is an articificiality to the sound of the PBJ's. To my ears, they are not a natural sounding cable. Exageration and brightness, may be appealing to some listeners and may be what makes this cable's sound "stand out", but I'm looking elsewhere for tonal accuracy. I've also noticed sibilance from this cable. Whether this quality is due to the PBJ or my equipment, I'm not 100% certain. What I can say is that, I've not had sibilance problems in my system using other high-quality cables. Not a smooth-sounding cable in my system! |
[May 06, 1998]
Tim T
an Audio Enthusiast
This is definitely the "best buy" in their price range. I replaced Monster Interlink 300 and the result is day and light. I can finally hear the high freq. For music I like them better than Monster M500i and for HT, Monster M500i will be my choice. |
[Jun 27, 1998]
an Audio Enthusiast
I auditioned the PBJ and had it compared with the interconnect that came with my Marantz CD80 which I owned for over seven years. The tonality was exactly the same with little improvement it soundstage even on a large speakers like the NHT 3.5Not worth the money. (nothng but a strand of copper wires terminated with RCA plugs) |
[May 12, 1998]
Veda
an Audio Enthusiast
The classic. Still a best buy but it's getting old. Sonic characteristic is typical to Kimber's smoothness. Great for entry level systems but watch out for the midrange glare. IMO, the Hero is a better deal. Audition it for about a week or so before deciding to keep it. 3 stars for sound/value. |
[May 16, 1998]
Andrew Dillon
an Audio Enthusiast
I had the PBJ between my Rotel 945ax and my TLC1-pre amp, and compared it for about two weeks with MIT Terminator 3. I wanted to prefer the Kimber PBJ largely because I hate the pseudo-scientific claims of the MIT cables, but when the time came to buy one and give the other back to my dealer, I ended up keeping the MIT. To my ears, and my partners, there was just a subtle loss of clarity with the Kimbers - very subtle, indeed - but enough to make me opt for the MIT T2s. In absolute terms both seemed fine and both were better than the old Monster interconnects I had (but let's be realistic here - neither were so obviously better that I felt I ought to consider even more expensive cabling to multiply the improvements). |
[Jul 14, 1998]
SGM
an Audio Enthusiast
I recently replaced some internal line level wiring in a tube integrated amp with Kimber TCSS (the bulk single wire hookup version of PBJ) and noticed a severe mid to high frequency brightness during initial operation. While detailed and fairly dynamic, it was obvious how many listeners would be put off with this wire prior to full break in. This brightness could only be magnified in a solid state system (and I imagine could sound downright harsh). However, after approximately 20 hours of use, the mid and high end glare gradually faded away and was replaced with a fairly balanced and detailed sound. Bass is accurate and detailed if slightly restrained (although with tube equipment this may not be completely accurate) Soundstaging and overall transparency and timbre are also very good. The budget Kimber copper wire is clearly no match for my Tara RSC Master Gen 2s (particularly in an interconnect application), but at a fraction of the Tara's price they still represent excellent value. As a hookup wire, with runs under 12 inches, the difference between TCSS and Kimber's silver wire is nominal compared to a 1 or 2 meter run (as would be found with an interconnect). While I would not use PBJs as interconnects, it is clear that once properly burned in they are solid performers in systems of intermediate resolution. As a hookup wire in TCSS form, in very short lengths, it cannot be beat for the price. Three stars for raw overall performance, five stars for value. |
[Jul 14, 1998]
Andrew Hires
an Audiophile
I owned the PBJ's for about 6 months until I thirsted for more. The PBJ's were smooth, but the sound was a little too "sticky" for my ears, especially the treble. I tried out Purist Audio Design's water cables and those babies cleansed my system of the sticky sound. The PBJ's could be considered opaque in the bass and translucent in the treble, while the PAD's were quite transparent. The high's were much smoother. But something wasn't right. I became uncomfortable after listening to the music for over an hour. I hungered for something a little more substatial in the bass region. I thought maybe I should burn them in a little more, so I stuck them in the microwave. Good Idea! My cable morphed into the PAD light-pulsing cables, and really brightened up the system. |
[Aug 07, 1998]
jeff green
an Audiophile
After reading the vast array of PBJ reviews and being an owner of many pairsof PBJ interconnects myself ( factory terminated and home brew terminations) I |