Hello all, new member here. Have been doing a lot of reading & there's lots of good info on here about the Furutech NCF stuff. I've swapped a couple of my outlets to the GTXD NCF versions & have been so impressed, its lead me to investigate swapping some of my power cables. The plan was to swap the one from wall to power bar & then from power bar to both DAC & phono stage (amp & pre are Naim & have Naim's own upgraded Powerline). I was previously using using some Neotech 3200 & 3001 in these areas all terminated in Furutech FI-15G IEC & FI 11/28 G males. To start I recently swapped the cord to my power bar with a DPS4.1 & FI50 NCF combo (also swapped my powerbar inlet to the 06 NCF). So I'm trying to figure out which way I should go with the DAC & phono. I was thinking to start with the FI-50 NCF on the male ends & use one of my current FI 15 G's on the IEC, if I like the gold I would then swap to the 46G's (& try a matching 50 NCF on the IEC as well). But I'm not sure what cable to go with, looks like the DPS & Alpha Nano seem to get the most praise. But from my reading, it appears they have a different sonic signature between each range & possibly even between the different awg sizes in the Alpha Nano series. Some are saying you can have too much of the DPS cable. So I'm wondering peoples thoughts & how these 4 cables compare, the 4.1, S022N, S032N & S55N & what might be the best choice for my DAC & phono? I did pick up some S022N to start with & will install after I have a few weeks run in on the DPS cable, I figure this would give me an idea of how the Alpha Nano series sounds like & then if the S032N or S55N might be a better option, I can move it elsewhere in the system to less critical/low current devices.
Furutech Bulk Power Cable
- Thread starter MrDJP
- Start date
-
- Tags
- diy furutech ncf power cable
I found that the 4.1 has a bit of an airy halo effect in the upper midrange and I really didn't like it. The S022N is serviceable enough and I use it on the linear power supplies for my router and switch, though I wouldn't use it higher up in the audio chain. For my server and my DAC, I use the S55N, and although it lacks the detail and resolution of the 4.1, I find it to be a much more balanced-sounding cable and it provides a pleasant listening experience.
Thanks for your experiences, did you try the S022N on your DAC vs the S55N, if so what were the differences between the two? My initial thought was to just get the S55N for my DAC & phono based on all the positive posts I've seen on it, but then wondered do you really need a 10awg cable on these low power devices & saw some posting's that they actually preferred the S022N on DAC's etc vs the larger awg versions.
Have you compared it to either of the S022N or S032N & which components are you using it on?
Depending how resolving your DAC is, I'm thinking the S022N might act as something of a brake on your system. It's a much cloudier-sounding cable and you'll lose a lot of detail. The 55N has more transparency, depth and soundstaging. The only real advantage of the 22N is that it is far more flexible than the 55N, and if your DAC is small and lightweight, there will be less physical strain from the cord.
Thanks, that's some helpful info. I'm currently using a Sonnet Digital Morpheus DAC & Simaudio 310LP, so not a real heavy pieces & my rack is a couple stacks of Naim fraim, which have glass shelves that float on ball bearings, so heavy/stiff cords can cause a bit of an issue. That was one of the reasons I was hoping something a bit more flexible vs what I'm currently using would do the trick, but I would never want to hold back performance just to make an easier install, so it sounds like I should pick up a couple lengths of the S55N to trial again the S022N I already have.
What ends have you tried on the S55N?
For the R2R Morpheus DAC, I would go with the more detailed-sounding power cable. With 55N, I'm using the FL46(G) connectors.
Yep, I've done the stiff cables with lightweight components floated on roller-blocks. It was like the Indy 500 in here! And as an aside: any of the off-the-spool raw cable from Furutech and Neotech is going to have flexibility issues because the conductors are tightly packed in a thick outer casing.
Rather interesting, I guess this just goes to show how there is no, one correct answer when it comes to audio & so much of it is about system matching/synergy/room/personal preference, etc, etc, etc. Obviously you like the FL46 G connectors on the 55N, which I was recently speaking with someone who tried gold & it didn't work for him at all & another who tried the 46G's & wasn't happy with their performance & preferred the lower 28G series.
Appreciate the input so far, again if others have still made any comparisons between the above 4 cables & with different ends, I'm still interested in hearing about your experiences. Obviously what worked best for you may not work for me, but it helps me to narrow down what to try vs what I've already got.
I use two S55N on my Aqua sources because Aqua gear is highly resolving.
S55N brings some meat and musicality but it is still very transparent.
Also have two DSP 4.1 on my Niagara 3000 and Vitus amp.
All FI50 connectors.
S55N brings some meat and musicality but it is still very transparent.
Also have two DSP 4.1 on my Niagara 3000 and Vitus amp.
All FI50 connectors.
Hello Thieliste,
I can gladly confirm this impression from my own experience.
The practical background was that I wanted to find out whether there was really something behind the "material idea" NCF and so my Furutech Nanoflux (version with the black block), which was equipped with Furutech FI 50 (the black ones) as standard, was extensively compared and assessed over several months with a change to FI 50 NCF.
Beforehand, I was skeptical that this "little piece of plastic wrapping around the contacts" could really generate a difference.
And yes, sweepingly paraphrased: better resolution.
If the "audio language" of the Rhodium material fits, which may not always be the case, I prefer the more consistent Rhodium FI 50 NCF version.
By the way: A Furutech Nanoflux converted to FI 50 NCF does not become a standard Nanoflux FI 50 NCF.
Photo FI 50 vs. FI 50 NCF and comparing different IEC layup , f.e. DIY rubber version vs. Furutech NCF booster (only laid on without clamping from above) final version.
A similar approach to my initial thoughts of having the DPS as the supply cable with the Alpha Nano series feeding the individual components. Did you compare with these cords in different locations? And did you make any comparisons of the DPS vs the S55N? It sounds like the general consensus is that from the Alpha Nano series, the S55N is the one to have no matter low or high current device. So I'll go with my initial plan of getting a couple lengths of this as well to make some further comparisons (both on cable & ends).
I don't know if there is any truth to this & can't recall now where I read it, but I had read that certain aspects of the sound, if the first PC in the chain loses an aspect, it can't be "brought back" by a better PC further down the chain. For example if resolution is lost from the first PC in the chain, adding a better resolving PC down the line won't bring it all back, which is one of the reasons why my initial thought was DPS from the wall to feed the power bar. In comparison, other aspects such as bass weight, could be influenced with a differ PC further down the line. Not sure if there is any truth to this, or if any have experimented?
I've made up a second cord with the S022N I currently have & will try this between powerbar & DAC as my next comparison. Used the FI50 NCF male & just a FI15+ gold IEC to see if I like one end being gold (& if so, will move to a 28 or 46 NCF). Last I listened I had ~240hrs run time on the DPS/FI-50 NCF combo (probably only 10-15hrs actual play time), there was a slight harshness that wasn't there on the good days of earlier breakin. It was there two evenings in a row, so I'm letting this cable run in longer as I've read it can take a very long time & don't want to introduce anymore changes till I'm sure its at its final sound.
Thought I would update this if anyone is following, so I now have 600 or so hours on the FI-50 NCF/DPS combo & its sounding excellent. I was starting to get a bit concerned during my last post with the harshness that was in the upper end, as it had it for a couple nights in a row & with ~250hrs I was worried it might not change much. After ~350hrs that went away & has been sounding excellent since. If it made changes after that they were minor, it still seemed to make small improvements but not sure if they were actual improvements or my ears/brain dialing into the sound. I do believe after this time bass has improved even further though (both in weight & articulation).
I've got the FI-50M NCF/S022N/15+ G assembled & is running in on my streamer. I've also picked up 4M of S55N to make two additional cords with, for my DAC & phono I will trial both the S022N & S55N to see whats a better match. Both will have 50M NCF & will start with 28 G on the IEC end, if this is a good match will swap the 28 for 46 NCF, if the gold is too warm/not transparent enough, it'll get the 50 NCF end as well.
I've got the FI-50M NCF/S022N/15+ G assembled & is running in on my streamer. I've also picked up 4M of S55N to make two additional cords with, for my DAC & phono I will trial both the S022N & S55N to see whats a better match. Both will have 50M NCF & will start with 28 G on the IEC end, if this is a good match will swap the 28 for 46 NCF, if the gold is too warm/not transparent enough, it'll get the 50 NCF end as well.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |