Sound Impressions: RUF-100 Ag vs. Average cable

Let’s do some A/B tests, comparing RUF-100 and an ordinary C-to-C cable. As for the source, we’ll use Muse HiFi M4 Player, Samsung Galaxy Note 10 Plus, Cayin N8 player, and a laptop PC. Testing IEMs are Rhapsodio Infinity 2, Subtonic Storm, BQEYZ Wind, and Kinera Verdandi.

RUF-100 brings a noticeable upgrade throughout the spectrum—first, the bass. The color tone of the bass gets noticeably bolder and thicker (not the actual thickness but the color). There’s quite a difference in the density too as the bass feels more concentrated and tighter. The reverbs are not affected yet the strike and decay from the bass have gotten more clean and agile. The improvement gets more noticeable when listening to music with speed or fast tempo, as the low-end dynamics are more tightly controlled.

Vocals gain a similar improvement as the bass. The density and tightness of the mid-range have increased, making the vocals more concentrated. Though RUF-100 does more to the vocals than it did with the bass. The texture of the vocals has gotten finer and clearer so that the grains pop out even better. This doesn’t alter the original tone or thickness of the mid-range, yet the higher density and finer texture details offer a feel that there’s more information inflow.

Alongside, the vague distinction between the sub-bass and low-mids is now better divided too. Highs are kept fairly the same as before but RUF-100 introduces more clarity and cleanness. The highs make clearer separation from the lower frequencies, allowing the treble instruments that used to be smudged to the background to stand out.

Sound Impressions: RUF-XC

The first improvement that I could sense is the texture. The textures are much finer and silkier. This change is especially evident for the vocals – then the trebles and the bass. IEMs that used to sound dry or rough in texture now sound much smoother.

It’s not the type of smoothening where the textures are dulled out. Instead, RUF-XC brings a change where the textures are more refined and leveled, filling up with more density between the “potholes” of these bumpy textures. Reference-tuned IEMs often have dryness in tone and texture to better reveal the details. RUF-XC still respects this nature so that the crispy dryness is still there but overall more refined. This change would particularly be great with IEMs that you found to have rough textures or a tad sibilant.

Anyhow, another major improvement is the density. The overall sound is tighter and more concentrated making the sound deeper and fuller in detail. The reverbs are made more boldly and naturally too. Diverting back to my average cable brings an immediate downgrade, making the tone lighter in depth and color as if watering down the sound density. 

As for the trebles, similarly to the other frequencies, the strands of treble details are more refined. There isn’t any change to the sound signature yet the texture and the nuance have improved quite noticeably. The separation between the frequencies is made clearer – so that the micro treble details that were hiding behind are now better heard. 

Although subtly, an actual alteration will be made once switching on to the UIF2 option. Compared to UIF1, the background has gotten noticeably cleaner and quieter, presenting a darker background. The bass gets mildly fuller and thicker in the body. The color is also thickened and makes the bass stand out more clearly.

Mids are further smoother than UIF1 too. As said, it’s not a type of smoothness that decreases the texture details but only evens the texture. Lastly, UIF2 brings out a more dynamic, grand, and wider soundstage than UIF1. Of course, the change isn’t as dramatic as turning on 3D mode on your phone’s sound effects. However, the staging boost effectively plays a role while perfectly upholding the original sound signature of the IEM.

--------------- Click here for detailed post ---------------