~ Relatively thin and light/easy to handle compared to other 'garden hose' i/c's.

~ Treble could be a bit more lush, but a fairly minor complaint considering overall performance vs. cost.

Bought as a demo for price above, so not a bad deal - probably the best-sounding i/c to be had for this price range. Excellent bass, somewhat recessed mids, nice highs. Lots of detail and speed without glare or grain. Seems quiet. Very good dynamics. Well-built.

Similar Products Used:

NBS, Audioquest, Acoustic Zen, Audio Research, Monster Cable, Tara Labs, Nordost, MIT, Madrigal, Rat Shack, Yamaha, others.

Deep bass response and excelent midrange.

To Expensive for certain people.

Try this Cable you'll find a new improvement from your Hi End systems.

Similar Products Used:

Monster Cable Sigma Interconnect, Tara Labs

Excellent cable! Upgraded from XLO Ref Type 1 some time ago to Van den Hul THE FIRST. Recently upgraded from THE FIRST to the XLO Sig Type 1.1 single ended interconnect. It is twice the price but actually twice as good!
Maintains the dynamics of the Type 1 but the hot treble is GONE. Just buy it and get the best of ALL worlds. Soundstage is huge, vocals are to die for, top end is extended, transparent and warm. The bass just flies - very dynamic. Great detail too, and orchestras have amazing depth.

Sounds best on my CAL Alpha CD player, but not as good on my Sonic Frontiers phono stage, so try it on various equipment. When the synergy is there, I give it 6/5. I am also using a Sonic preamp and Counterpoint power amp. All components are hybrid tube/s.s. Also using XLO Type 5 bi-cable.

I have XLO Sigs. throughout my system. Most connections are balanced. No real point of comparison as previous cables were AQ Ruby and Quartz, good cables at their price point. XLO uses teflon insulation through their lines and I have found that teflon cables sound better than PVC or other materials. AQ Emerald uses teflon as well as other cable mfrs. in their higher priced cables. Roger Skoff of XLO has written a couple of white papers and did a long technical interview with Stereophile concerning his ideas on cable design. His theories make more electrical engineering sense than any other babble or spin from the other cable theorists (Tara and Cardas). XLO cables can consistently be had for 40% off retail. Add this to their fab sound and you have a high end steal.

Excellent balance and detailed

Too analytical and cool. Lack of musciality

This cable has been highly recommended a few years ago in local journal. I bought it and I think that it worth its price. Analyitcal, powerful and balance. If you compare it with those cable with soft tone you will hear a big difference. Excellent as ic between pre and power amp, too dry and mechanical between CD and preamp, and intolerable as phone cable, although the background is still silent.

Cannot be replaced as ic between my ML 380S and CJ premier one.

Similar Products Used:

Straight wire crescendo, VDH the first, Tara Lan RSC master, Tara lab Decade, Madrigal HPC, etc.

1. Does not alter the speed of music. 2. Good neutrality at this price

1. The treble. 2. Lack of body to the midrange.

Many of us can’t afford those top-notch super-duper massively expensive interconnects. Furthermore, we want something better than the budget models, good as they may be. So what if you want something really excellent, but can’t pay for the top-of-the-line stuff? Well, the XLO Signature 1.1 may be the answer.

Years ago, when I was first putting together a high-end audio system, I auditioned this interconnect. At the time, I was not impressed. Now that I have higher-resolution equipment, I revisited the Signature 1.1, and now I realize the folly of my ways. It turns out that my old equipment simply was not that high-performing. The Signature 1.1 was only passing along what the equipment sounded like.

No matter what I hook the Signature 1.1 up with, the cable imparts its sonic Signature on the treble. The extension and air remain, but high-frequency information is robbed of sheen, tonal color, and correct instrumental timbre. While image specificity is above average, image depth is foreshortened. Thus, trebles sound somewhat cold and two-dimensional.

Midrange data are focused, with razor-sharp image outlines. However, this leads to a lack of fullness, roundness, and body. I can turn the volume up, but scale-wise, the mids remain a bit too small.

Other than these two criticisms, the XLO Signature 1.1 is an honest, neutral performer. It does not slow down or speed up what’s fed to it. It does not blur image outlines. It does not add that stupid warm, bass-heavy coloration prevalent in 85% of what passes as “high-end” cable these days. It does not obscure bass information. Until you use cables of this caliber, you might not know what a variety of sound exists in the bass regions. With the Signature 1.1, you will hear the texture, pressure, and direction of the movement of low-frequency air.

The Signature 1.1 sounds okay out of the box, but it takes a full six weeks, before it burns in fully, and sounds the way it should. Be patient, and do not jump to any premature conclusions. In use, make sure that you tighten the RCA plugs. Do not bend the cable at sharp angles (duh!). Keep an anti-static spray handy, to prevent electrostatic buildup from hindering your cables’ performance.

Top-notch interconnects now cost over $1500 a one-meter pair. When I tell you that, at $625 for a one-meter pair, the XLO Signature 1.1 performs at 75-80% of those price-no-object models, you should listen.

Similar Products Used:

Audioquest Lapis and Diamond; Kimber Kable KCAG, KCTG, and KS-1030; Tara Labs ISM-3, The 2, and The One; XLO Reference 2 and Limited Edition.