I've tried endless cables and managed a HiFi store for many years. AudioTruth Emerald is the most spacious, fast, detailed, tight cable I've heard. I prefer them to the Diamond which I found brash and un-natural. I run mainly Quad valve, Linn Aktiv, Alchemist (Tim De P), gear.

o Clean, neutral and open yet characteristically sweet. o Good soundstage with firmer and more extended bass than Opals. o Faster than the Opals.

o These are not 'in your face' cables and if you are looking for this, look elsewhere.

Having gone through several interconnects with my system(Rotel 1090/1080 and a/d/s L1290s & L1090s), I finally settled on Audioquest Opals. Got the upgrade bug and bought Emeralds in .5m($95) for preamp to amp and 1m for cd(rotel 991 AE) to preamp. The Emerald was the next upgrade to the Opal and best copper cable Audioquest made at the time. The main difference is the use of teflon. While subtle, they produce somewhat crisper and more open highs and better soundstage and tighter, more extended bass but still maintain the sweetness of the Opals. They sound similar to the Wireworld Polaris but sweeter and have a larger soundstage. For this price point, I am very satisfied and think they are a great value. As a matter of fact, I prefer Audioquest's older cables to their newer line-up.

Similar Products Used:

o Audioquest Ruby and Opal, Kimber Silver Streak and KS-1010, Wireworld Polaris.

In my first review I noted that the AQ Diamonds sounded better, and like other audio nuts, I suppose, I couldn't bear to think that there is something better out there, and eventually I got myself some of these silver cables. Now may as well pass on my current impressions (and not intending to burst anyone's bubble). In my system the Emeralds are a bit harsh on top. Diamond treble is nicer, more natural. On some (not all) recordings, I found brass to be pinched sounding, not quite like the real thing. Likewise, the Emerald bass lacks a little oomph factor. But it isn't just specific analytical points. In my system, which is a strange amalgam of used hi-end components and value buys, the Diamonds were far beyond the Emeralds, they made a very big subjective improvement. Yes the Emeralds are a good "value" cable, you can live with them, but my advice is the best cable is the best in any system, even if they cost far too much. Try the best cables first, you might be surprised to discover that your components are better than you thought.

detailed, smooth sounding, dynamic, full body soundstage, midrange richness.

material used for outter surface layer (easy to get scratched), DIA of the cable is a bit thick. not as clear & tight as the highest end cable (like Taralab the one) on bottom frequency. Treble is very clean & clear but comparatively a bit not as extended as THE ONE from Taralab.

With the AQ emerald first connected on my system, it sounded like I had replaced a more powerful amp on my system, sound faster in every respect, clearer on midhig. As I only paid for it for US90. If it wasn't a best buy then what else could it be ?

Similar Products Used:

TaraLab the one (borrowed), Kimber KGAG, PBJ, AT58, MIT, XLO etc.

Fast, warm, laid back presentation

not as fast as XLO Sig.

Sadly out of production now. A great used cable bargain. Almost gets to XLO Signature but probably closer to XLO Reference. Was the top of the line copper cable by AQ and was actually part of the AudioTruth line. Fast, detailed but warm sounding. May be prefered over the faster XLO's which also can sound lean or cold but are very fast, accurate and ultra revealing. Teflon is the secret ingredient here.

Similar Products Used:

XLO Sig, XLO Ref., AQ Quartz

Are my ears tricking me, or can cables make a significant difference in sound quality? I tracked down a used 1M pair of Emerald cables (AudioTruth X3 variety). I was using Audioquest Turquoise with my Rotel RCD-971/Plinius 8150i/Dynaudio Contour 1.8s/JPSLabs Ultraconductor speaker wire. When I previously auditioned cables before, I thought Turquoise was the best of a low-priced bunch. I didn't like the Kimber PBJs or the Monster 440s. The JPS Labs Ultraconductor interconnect sounded very similar to the Turquoise (surprised me). But, hey, I wondered what a high-end cable would sound like and jumped for a pair of Emeralds at a reasonable price.

The difference with the Emeralds was noticeable IMMEDIATELY. Suddenly, things started to sparkle a bit more and the sound took on a shimmering, delicate smoothness. Joni Mitchel on BLUE on the Blue track (#5) on the CD (which is my current demo track) sounded more than real with the Emeralds. With the Turquoise, it sounded excellent but not holographic. With Emeralds, Joni was in the room. It was scary! I'm not too prone to psychological A/B bias, having rejected a bunch of cables previously. I put on more music and wondered what was going on. Similar results. Another "Blue" track from Leane Rimes (from BLUE) again was astonishing in the mids. So smooth. Highs were crisper and more defined. Of course, the rest of my equipment is terrific, but now, too, was the interconnect.

But these are subtle, but audible differences. I still recommend the Turquoise cables for starter sets, but I'm very impressed with the Emeralds. I hope they continue to hold up.

Recently I made 2 cable purchases, a Canare Digiflux digital cable and Audioquest Emerald ICs. I went after the AQs because I have a Mod Squad line drive, and from reading through some old Stereophile mags, got the idea that passive preamps sound better with low capacitance cables. I switched both into my system at the same time, so it's hard to tell what portion of the different sound I'm hearing is due to the Canare and which is the AQ. Maybe I can sort that out later. Overall I think the sound is improved, and I can live with both cables. I don't feel that the cables make an ! diff, but they do improve micro-dynamics and treble, and bass firmness. They have excellent tonal and harmonic honesty.
The thing that makes it difficult to judge cables, is that you don't really have a point of comparison. You don't know after all what your components REALLY sound like, because you've never heard them except through cables. I suppose that by having the best cables in your system you can get an impression. In comparing the Emerald with AQ Diamond (through the loan program of the Cable Company) I could hear the improvements made by the Diamonds; those improvements are real, if not night-and-day. It's was the subtle change that leaves you scratching your head -- are they worth 3 times more? At any rate, if you do have passive pre-amp, definitely go for something low capacitance. AQ stuff is worth trying.
The 4 stars is only because I heard the slightly better Diamonds .

AQ Emerald-X3, quite simply the best run I've ever had between a CD player and an amp (or a pre-amp). At any cost, for that matter. No questions!

I have to agree the performance of these cables doesn't match the price point, the diamonds are better, but much more expensive (unless you get them used). Try harmonic technologies or Silver Audio in the same price range. They are better than a 1 though, thats for Monster and Radio Shack.

Good Value
Excellent tonal balance
Neutrality
Transparency

I found none

By far if you are looking for a great cable with great cost/performance ratio, this is one serius alternative.
I only recomend that you ballance adequately the tonal and sonic character of your system electronics and speakers with the characteristics of the cable itself.
This cables doesn't color or help anyone, so you just will hear all good or all bad your system is...
Also think or evaluate the Harmonic Technology's line... are superb to..

Similar Products Used:

Monster Cables up to M1000 Mk II
Harmonic Technology Truth Link / Precission Link