I spent a couple hours comparing 10 tracks, without and with bi-wire runs. No AC, no fans, no refrigerator. As quiet as can be for daytime. ~35dB ITU-R 468 noise weighting on non-calibrated iPhone but it’s close to my $100 calibrated one so I’m going with it
Some tracks show an advantage with bi-wire more than others. My initial feelings continue to be unchanged, I hear deeper and farther, more engaging and less congestion. It’s really splitting hairs though.
It’s subtle and is wiped out by any background noise (on top of the noise floor of course), which is why I’ve not committed to them yet. I’m afraid they simply wouldn’t be missed enough to warrant the $ and the extra cable to manage.
I kept notes and will repeat the ‘proof of value’ again in a couple weeks - going on a road trip
Yes, bi-wire is a dusting the top of the window and door jams kind of thing.
Bi-wire does reduce IM based on splitting the superimposed signals into two smaller signal groups. The more complex and wide band the source, the more it will be heard. This is factual to how multiple alternating current signals behave.
Can you differentiate the sound quality differences between short and long ICs of the same cable? For example, between 3 ft and 15 ft BAV XLR, or between 3ft and 15ft 4X4 ETPC/UPOCC XLR. If you can, which pair is the difference bigger, the former or the latter?
Can you differentiate the sound quality differences between short ICs of different designs? For example, between 2 ft BAV XLR and 2 ft Iconoclast 4X4 ETPC/UPOCC XLR?
Here is the DATA on that question. The inductance is best kept as low as you can for PHASE, but capacitance still needs to be alternately held low, too. But, the “balance” is to lean towards Inductance. Capacitance isn’t hurting phase until it reaches the 3-dB cut-off low pass filter frequency and that’s far, far too high to be an issue with audio. What capacitance can do, is upset your I/O stability or amplifier (speaker cables). But, modern op-amps are way more stable than before so long leads of either type are an option; long IC short speaker or long speaker short IC. 30 to 50 feet is common on IC cables.
OK, so now we know which should be lower, L or C, what changes are there? L and C variables ADD with length. This will impact phase. How much of this you hear outside of your speakers (way worse than cable) is hard to say. What you DO HEAR is the improved higher frequency IMPEDANCE, or Rs, of the 1x4 and 4x4 over the 1x2 and 4x1 designs. Using smaller wires factually can be measured to show better high frequency linearity using a SWEPT measurement trace. The design of the cable impacts this variable. I use the word “impedance” as it is a FREQUENCY related variable and not a true RF impedance.
The cable LENGTH is important, but the wire IMPEDANCE is more efficient at ANY length as far as being audible. Rs remain flatter at any cable length. The decision should be if you are using ANALOG, use the new 1x4 and 4x4 design. If you are using 110-ohm AES/EBU DIGITAL, use the 1x1 and 4x1 design. If you are using 75-ohm S/PDIF DIGITAL use the 1x4 or 4x4 design.
Most home users have S/PDIF and ANALOG sources, so the same 1x4 and 4x4 cable(s) can be used making life easier.
What you HEAR and what I design to and MEASURE isn’t the same thing. I can guarantee a measurement, but not what everyone hears. ICONOCLAST is more about the MEASUREMENTS and how it drives the design. Better is better and if it isn’t better it certainly can’t be “heard” as better…if not by some and never all.
Thanks Galen. Now, could you please comment on the level of a 6th-grade knowledge on RLC? Unfortunately, I deal with human, not electronics.
For my first question, for example, you may state that you should not hear a difference between a 3ft and 15 ft BAV (or 4X4 TPC or UPOCC) analog XLR cable; or, due to design/material differences, the difference you will hear is bigger between 3ft and 15 ft BAV analog XLR cable, compared to the difference between 3ft and 15 ft 4x4 TPC analog XLR cable; i.e., I will understand better if you say that as long as the length is reasonable, other characteristics do not matter as much, like girth, or you say when the length is longer, other characteristics will matter more, like girth.
For my second question, you may state that if the cable is really short, you most likely won’t hear a difference between BAV or 4x4 TPC/UPOCC, i.e., I will understand better if you say that if the cable is short enough, other characteristics do not matter much, like girth, or you say that if the cable is short, other characteristics will matter more, like girth.
Forgot to mention, my questions have real implications. Currently I will need both a short (like 2-3 ft) analog XLR cable between my PS Audio DAC and BHK pre, and a long (13-15 ft) analog XLR cable between BHK pre and BHK 300. It will be expensive if getting both 4x4 UPOCC. Making sense to get a short UPOCC and long BAV? or short TPC and long TPC?, etc.
Zzheng4 - thanks for that question. I, too, would like to know where one could expect the greatest payoff in sound quality (or even some measurable characteristic that we are hoping will translate into improved sound quality) when one is assembling a system with both short and long cables. Even for my long run from pre to power amps, the price difference between BAV and TPC 4x1 (AKA 1st gen iconoclast) is not huge. But perhaps it would be more cost effective to put the extra dollars into a 2nd gen cable for the short run.
Everyone will “hear” differences at different lengths and copper material, so there is no absolute answer other than the shorter the cable the better, yes. The better the copper the sooner it will sound “no better” as you make the length shorter.
Most would ALREADY say that 5 foot IC and 10 foot speaker cables can’t sound different, but even at those lengths they do. The numbers support the concept that they are “good enough” to be the same.
This is the situation we are in as the numbers are better but yes, seem to be irrelevant, and yet we hear improvements.
Listen to two different five foot IC lengths using TPC and OFE copper. What do YOU hear? Buy the level that stops making a difference to you.
All the design decisions are made using 5 foot and 10 foot “standard” lengths.
Hi Galen, “The better the copper the sooner it will sound “no better” as you make the length shorter.”, saying in a different way, the better the copper, the longer the cable will maintain the sound quality when the cable gets longer, right? Then I should spend more on the 15ft IC.
Copper draw designs have a patina to each one that is audible. As you get shorter and shorter this difference REMAINS, but is less easily heard. The wire impedance is more pronounced, and heard at a shorter reach, than copper.
The current market is selling all sorts of MATERIALS that are not in any way connected to a proven cable electromagnetic DESIGN. A Ferrari is a DESIGN, the car is made out of MATERIALS. You are way better off with a good design than a lesser design made with esoteric materials.
All ICONOCLAST share the same premium DESIGN and thus the difference between the cables is only the copper choice. This is slight, as the overall design is doing MOST of the job.
I would stick with the copper draw science; TPC, OFE or UPOCC that you like the best in any length.
Galen, my amp manufacturer (Benchmark) claims better measured performance using speakon terminated speaker cables. I see that this is an option for the iconoclast speaker cables. Any thoughts on this? Would you recommend doing this for the benchmark ahb2?
Galen will get back to you shortly. We have done a number of cable assemblies using the Speakon terminations. Sounds like a good marriage for your system.
If the connector back-shell can fit ICONOCLAST sized cable…I see no issue. But, if you have to use inferior zip cord type cable to use a supposedly “better” connector than no, it won’t be better. Lower measured specs is compared to a lesser cable use with spades or SPEAKON connectors, not ICONOCLAST with spade. A connector won’t make zip cord, or any other cable, ICONOCLAST. I wish it was that easy!
I agree with the twist-lock “design” though. For studio use this is a plus as they won’t use top flight measuring cable as zip cord suits them fine. The safety factor is HUGE for them. Most speakers in studios are going to digital or analog XLR into CLASS D amplified speakers, even better. This is why the BAV XLR is made for AES/EBU and analog, both, and with the same cable.
I have Benchmark AHB2 amps also and Iconoclast / blue jeans mounted nice SpeakOn connectors on their speaker cables. Spades on the other end. Works great.
Since you also run the PSAudio DSD. Have you moved over to the Windom 4.01 firmware release.? I have found it is a great pairing with the SPTPC speaker cables and the UPOCC ICs. The ability of the firmware to provide noise reduction and detail is just exquisite. it has further reaffirmed my cable choices.
To Iconoclast User Community,
I was also interested in how the users of the Iconoclast are feeling about Windom based on their speaker cable and IC copper choices. Especially the OFC crowd. I would think the folks that needed OFC could now enjoy the SPTPC since Windom has made all highs blissful for me but some users had different preferences. Never overstated or biting but all the info there for me truly sublime.
That makes 3-of us! It’s amazing how I keep saying it can’t get any better…and then it does. So yes as wglenn says, “we” are smitten with Windom. I too have a DSD paired with a Pass Labs XP12 and have nothing but smiles with SPTPC speaker leads and UPOCC ICs. You all probably knew that I would say these things… Thank you VMAX and wglennfor the great post and comments!! And thank you Ted Smith for continuing the evolution of the DSD! Galen too, is very busy these days.
It sure has been quiet on the Iconoclast thread. I’m grateful for the new posts.
