We had a chance to listen to a couple of interconnects and a pair of speaker cables from Tchernov, a Russian brand. They claim to have 150 years of experience in cable industry! What is unique about their audio cables portfolio is that they have only two models in each range, so as to avoid confusions in the buyers mind. They have their products lined up under Junior series, Original series, Special series, Classic series and Reference series with pricing of lowest to highest in that order. All their copper cables are of multistrand design and their multi layer shielding have damping and antistatic properties to reduce interferences, as mentioned in one of their literatures.
Beesound Inc, based out in Bengaluru, has taken up the authorized distributorship of Tchernov in India. They were kind enough to lend some of their products for us to write a review about. Thanks to our Supermod for organizing for the same. Thanks to FMs who showed keenness in listening to them. :clapping:
The team comprised of Denom, Hemant, Santy and docd. What we had in our bags were one pair each of Cuprum Junior 75 RCA IC (1m), Cuprum Original 75 RCA IC (0.65m), Cuprum Original Two SC spade terminated speaker cables (2.65m). All new! Great! :licklips:
Firstly we had decided to test these gorgeous looking cables at my home with the following gear in place. Laptop/Foobar -> Beresford Caiman -> Sansui AUD7 - > Energy RC-30 speakers. We also had docds Marantz PM6002 for shunting in the chain in place of the vintage amp. Just listening is not adequate; life is all about comparisons. So we had setup a war of English vs Russian, as we also had Chord Carnival Silver Screen (CSS) and Chord Crimson Plus (CCP) with us, which are considered to be of great VFM.
The Tchernov Original speaker cables were pre-terminated on both ends with superb quality spades, but sadly, I had to truncate one end of it half-heartedly, as my amp does not allow spades or plugs. The core was very thick, almost twice the diameter of CSS. We assumed that it is close to 10AWG, whereas the CSS is of 15 units. Tchernov were parallelly fused wires while CSS is of twisted configuration if I am right. The thin core of CSS was compensated in diameter by its heavy shielding. The Russian RCAs were finely finished, with the classic being more bulkier. They had open metal connections while the CCP had plastic sealed plug (VEE).
We have perfect A/b comparisons possible with Speaker A/ B switching for cables and Source switching for ICs. We had played several tracks, mostly Denoms favourites and a few Hindi numbers.
First we tried to understand the difference between the ICs but after straining our ears for a good 20 min, we could hardly find a difference. The more expensive Original series ICs did seem to breathe more than Junior ones, but the difference was too subtle to comprehend in normal listening.
Now comes the speaker cable comparison. We did a quick switching between the two and also patiently listened to entire tracks before switching. The Tchernovs were better in mid ranges with voices being more alive, just though. The frequencies in 200 to 500 hz range were somewhat more emphasized, some audiophiles would really like it. The highs were perfect as it should be and not straining at all. Quiet passages were clearly heard. The bass response was very appropriate though I felt it intruded the vocal frequencies slightly. The resolution and overall presentation was very good and we already started wondering what would be the price.:clapping:
The chord on the other side was more opened up with more detailing. The highs were smooth and silky though the mids were somewhat thin so it may not be a good match for warm speakers. Fatigue may be possible if paired with bright speakers. We then switched to Marantz which we felt was little under powered and was slightly congested, but the mids / vocals were more involving and enjoyable with the Marantz especially at low volumes. The differences or inferences of the cables and ICs were almost similar as with the other amp. We did some blind testing with Denom and he identified the cables rightly so we concluded that our analysis are not cynical. End of round one.
We wanted to test them out with a CD player so we landed up at docds place the following week. Thanks to doc for organizing the second round. We had his Marantz CD5001 and Hemants CD6000SE next to it. Caiman was also present for comparison. With the same Marantz amp, we have Sonodyne 2605 floorstanders for the test.
This time around we compared using left and right balancing,. ie Russian cables on left and Chord on right speaker. Denom felt its not a great way to compare, but I thoughts its not a bad idea. With the ICs showing no difference again, Hemants first impression was in favour of Tchernov speaker cables. However, others felt that though warm and natural, the sound from Tchernov was not coming on to us, while the throw of CSS was much farther. The Tchernov was again better in crisp vocals while CSS was refined in high frequency department. The entire low frequency was full bodied with Tchernov while Chord was tight and fast. Eventually, docd agreed that both these cables were far better than the entry level QEDs he had.
Towards the end, we could not say who is the clear winner since it ultimately boils down to personal preference of listening. The Tchernov speaker cables performed well in the entire frequency range but congestion was a factor while the chord being more detailed and smooth, was slightly brighter. The Cuprum Original 1m is about twice the price of CCP 1m. The Cuprum Original speaker cable is roughly four times as expensive as the CSS. But I personally feel that the Russian brand may do more justice in a higher end system since an expensive cable/ IC upgrade wont show a difference unless the cables being replaced are the weakest link in that chain. In our setups, other components are all obviously budget choices. Also they were brand new and hardly burnt, so it may improve on usage- though I have no reservations in this.
On a closing note, nobody would go wrong in buying the cables (original series or higher up) from Tchernovnone will go unimpressed with it, IMHO.
Disclaimer: We neither represent Tchernov nor we are compensated for writing about their products.
Now for some visual treat:
Cuprum Junior 1m
Cuprum Original 0.65m
Tough built, nice finish
Junior and Original
Speaker cables- quite heavy!
Not made in China
Testing ground
Budget kings
UK vs Russia
Round 2
I request FMs Denom, DocD and Hemant to do the favours of adding more to this review. Though I have used we in many places, I am sure their versions may slightly differ. The Russian cables might be on its way HFV store with a tag of discount, but we are not sure.
Beesound Inc, based out in Bengaluru, has taken up the authorized distributorship of Tchernov in India. They were kind enough to lend some of their products for us to write a review about. Thanks to our Supermod for organizing for the same. Thanks to FMs who showed keenness in listening to them. :clapping:
The team comprised of Denom, Hemant, Santy and docd. What we had in our bags were one pair each of Cuprum Junior 75 RCA IC (1m), Cuprum Original 75 RCA IC (0.65m), Cuprum Original Two SC spade terminated speaker cables (2.65m). All new! Great! :licklips:
Firstly we had decided to test these gorgeous looking cables at my home with the following gear in place. Laptop/Foobar -> Beresford Caiman -> Sansui AUD7 - > Energy RC-30 speakers. We also had docds Marantz PM6002 for shunting in the chain in place of the vintage amp. Just listening is not adequate; life is all about comparisons. So we had setup a war of English vs Russian, as we also had Chord Carnival Silver Screen (CSS) and Chord Crimson Plus (CCP) with us, which are considered to be of great VFM.
The Tchernov Original speaker cables were pre-terminated on both ends with superb quality spades, but sadly, I had to truncate one end of it half-heartedly, as my amp does not allow spades or plugs. The core was very thick, almost twice the diameter of CSS. We assumed that it is close to 10AWG, whereas the CSS is of 15 units. Tchernov were parallelly fused wires while CSS is of twisted configuration if I am right. The thin core of CSS was compensated in diameter by its heavy shielding. The Russian RCAs were finely finished, with the classic being more bulkier. They had open metal connections while the CCP had plastic sealed plug (VEE).
We have perfect A/b comparisons possible with Speaker A/ B switching for cables and Source switching for ICs. We had played several tracks, mostly Denoms favourites and a few Hindi numbers.
First we tried to understand the difference between the ICs but after straining our ears for a good 20 min, we could hardly find a difference. The more expensive Original series ICs did seem to breathe more than Junior ones, but the difference was too subtle to comprehend in normal listening.
Now comes the speaker cable comparison. We did a quick switching between the two and also patiently listened to entire tracks before switching. The Tchernovs were better in mid ranges with voices being more alive, just though. The frequencies in 200 to 500 hz range were somewhat more emphasized, some audiophiles would really like it. The highs were perfect as it should be and not straining at all. Quiet passages were clearly heard. The bass response was very appropriate though I felt it intruded the vocal frequencies slightly. The resolution and overall presentation was very good and we already started wondering what would be the price.:clapping:
The chord on the other side was more opened up with more detailing. The highs were smooth and silky though the mids were somewhat thin so it may not be a good match for warm speakers. Fatigue may be possible if paired with bright speakers. We then switched to Marantz which we felt was little under powered and was slightly congested, but the mids / vocals were more involving and enjoyable with the Marantz especially at low volumes. The differences or inferences of the cables and ICs were almost similar as with the other amp. We did some blind testing with Denom and he identified the cables rightly so we concluded that our analysis are not cynical. End of round one.
We wanted to test them out with a CD player so we landed up at docds place the following week. Thanks to doc for organizing the second round. We had his Marantz CD5001 and Hemants CD6000SE next to it. Caiman was also present for comparison. With the same Marantz amp, we have Sonodyne 2605 floorstanders for the test.
This time around we compared using left and right balancing,. ie Russian cables on left and Chord on right speaker. Denom felt its not a great way to compare, but I thoughts its not a bad idea. With the ICs showing no difference again, Hemants first impression was in favour of Tchernov speaker cables. However, others felt that though warm and natural, the sound from Tchernov was not coming on to us, while the throw of CSS was much farther. The Tchernov was again better in crisp vocals while CSS was refined in high frequency department. The entire low frequency was full bodied with Tchernov while Chord was tight and fast. Eventually, docd agreed that both these cables were far better than the entry level QEDs he had.
Towards the end, we could not say who is the clear winner since it ultimately boils down to personal preference of listening. The Tchernov speaker cables performed well in the entire frequency range but congestion was a factor while the chord being more detailed and smooth, was slightly brighter. The Cuprum Original 1m is about twice the price of CCP 1m. The Cuprum Original speaker cable is roughly four times as expensive as the CSS. But I personally feel that the Russian brand may do more justice in a higher end system since an expensive cable/ IC upgrade wont show a difference unless the cables being replaced are the weakest link in that chain. In our setups, other components are all obviously budget choices. Also they were brand new and hardly burnt, so it may improve on usage- though I have no reservations in this.
On a closing note, nobody would go wrong in buying the cables (original series or higher up) from Tchernovnone will go unimpressed with it, IMHO.

Disclaimer: We neither represent Tchernov nor we are compensated for writing about their products.
Now for some visual treat:
Cuprum Junior 1m


Cuprum Original 0.65m



Tough built, nice finish

Junior and Original

Speaker cables- quite heavy!

Not made in China

Testing ground

Budget kings

UK vs Russia

Round 2



I request FMs Denom, DocD and Hemant to do the favours of adding more to this review. Though I have used we in many places, I am sure their versions may slightly differ. The Russian cables might be on its way HFV store with a tag of discount, but we are not sure.