2. cables
  3. 1363594803

Impressed by Pangea Audio AC-9SE

I have been using Lamm monoblocks with Kimber PK10 Palladian for years. The PK10 Palladian are great sounding power cable and can stand the test of time.

Lately I ran across some threads about the Pangea Audio AC-9 and AC-9SE power cables. Lots of folks raved about these cables here in Audiogon. The SE sells for $200/2m each at Audio Advisor with 30-day trial. I thought I got nothing to loose and want to find out what all the hypes about these cables. I ordered the SE version.

I was totally surprised that the AC-9SE sounded very close to the Kimber. The main difference is that the AC-9SE sounded a bit thicker and a tiny bit more punch in the bass than the KImber. The PK-10 Palladian was just a tad more air on top. The $200 AC-9SE competes toe-to-toe witht the $1000 Kimber. Amazing. In fact, the thicker sounding AC-9SE matches a bit better than the Kimber in my upgraded system. Talking about synergy here.

I recommend folks who have modest or even megabuck system should try out the AC-9SE. Don't let the low price fool you. You may be surprised.

Happy listening.
audiolui
dopogue
1,773 posts
 
The AC-9SE is definitely the real deal, IMHO. I had wired my amps and regenerating power conditioner -- PS Audio P10 -- with the earlier AC-9 and tried one SE version (on the P10) just to see if I could tell the difference. There was enough that I replaced all the AC-9s.

I'm assuming everyone knows not to use the fire-hose AC-9/SE PCs on anything BUT amps, as the manufacturer advises. The thinner AC-14SE power cords work a lot better on preamps and source gear, again IMHO.
audiolui OP
295 posts
 
Rlwainwright,
Yep, I am thinking putting the Kimber up for sale.

Dopogue,
This thing is addictive. Now I want to try out the AC-14SE for my preamp just for the heck of it. I agree the AC-9SE is made for amps. The AC-9SE is heavy and thick and I have to use some rolled-up card board to support the cables, especially right below the IEC.
rhljazz
1,253 posts
 
I'm using an AC9SE between my VAC amp and a Shunyata Triton. It replaced a Nordost Brahma. The AC9SE did not sound very good straight out of the box (no highs, no lows, and recessed). It required some break-in time of around 20 hrs. Compared to the Brahma, it's actually better top and bottom, a bit leaner through the lower midrange.

Yeah, then there is that big price difference. I too have wondered what the AC14SE would sound like on the preamp, but then there is that break-in time.
Post removed 
audiolui OP
295 posts
 
Rhljazz,
Interesting. I got a total different experience than yours with the AC-9SE. Right out of the box, it was a bit rough and edgy on top. After two to three hours, it started mellowing out a bit. It was quite transaprent with good lows, mids and highs right out of the box. I need to break it in more. Wonder how long it would take to really break it in.
More to discover