It’s nice to know that science prevails even if we cant always measure why.
I am subjective too as I couldn’t mentally grasp anything past simple 12VDC going thru a knife switch.
1 Like
That’s pretty much it Get the DESIGN right and EVERYTHING is better, not just what we define as measurements but I can’t believe if those aren’t optimized the rest will follow along. Eventually we’ll be able to define what they are up to.
For now, I chose to get the fundamentals lined up the way the physics suggests I should and go from there. As far as the copper, the TPC performs so well it would be a shame to not offer it. It eclipses stuff many times the price. Both the TPC and SPTPC. I respect the differences…even if we can’t see them in the R, L and C measurement number properties and what those impact.
I have a M40 HV mono amps that run in A or AB mode. The distortion numbers are so “small” that it seems inconsequential to how the two modes should sound. Nope, the two are different for sure. The dynamic reactive loads impact each amp style differently playing music. We don’t have numbers that define those non linear loads on an amp…we just simple resistivity. And we don’t use amps like that.
I apologize for not getting freaky with the unknowns as so much still needs to be managed with the known physics in my mind. Until we have the absolute best car the best tire (we’ll say that’s the magic stuff) can’t be fully utilized. 1313A zip cord style using ANY metal can’t touch ICONOCLAST weave design. The impedance is higher by near double in the low-end and the Vp linearity isn’t as controlled with one fat wire. This is all in the numbers.
Stick with me on this, I have some interesting stuff to present to the group. All based on reality physics. Sound like it will be boreing? I don’t think so, it is really cool how it works.
Best,
Galen
8 Likes
No - that’s fine - I’m with you. I was talking about a theoretically narrower difference in design, linearity and LCR than that, where the metal would bridge the gap.
1 Like
Galen, have I understood correctly that you (we) don’t fully know why the grades of copper in your designs sound different?
The parts that you do know, or have glimpses of (hypotheses), could you tell us?
1 Like
One thing I can tell you Galen as a result of your recent posts I am certain I now know how a fish feels when he has been securely hooked.
You have my attention fully. Can’t wait to own one of your new designs.
9 Likes
No, no clue what’s going on there with the sound of copper except if it sounds different it is in the time domain. The single voltage that is crated by superposition has frequencies shifted between the copper. But, that situation is so slight over what a cable’s Vp relative to frequency does it seems implausible to hear it.
Another way to look at it, if we improve’s a cable’s Vp to frequency, make Vp more the same as we can, it would seem this is HUGELY more likely to be heard over the copper’s changes.
Some will argue the changes are equally beneficial. This I do know, addressing the DESIGN and NOT the materials is far, far more value oriented than using $$$ materials. Thus I concentrate on the value and design side for you all. This stuff gets expensive fast.
I can leverage the DESIGN across every product in a product category, lowering production cost by using the same high quality “chassis” as it were.
I think we have our hands full with the copper choices we have now.
Best,
Galen
3 Likes
No sales hookes. The people that can benefit will know who they are. If you can’t tell if a products may help you, I didn’t do my jobs explaining it’s application to you properly. We’ll get to that later!
Once you know HOW it is working you can quickly determine its beneficial, or not, application in your system. Some can benefit and some may not it all depends.
The HOOK is more about the knowledge of HOW cable really works and that is very interesting to work with. We all benefit from the design knowledge change and a different way to make analog most linear as we can.
The intent is to get people that NEED the tech a better option to consider than what’s been used before. Not everyone will be in the group making that decision. Everyone won’t need to make a change at all.
Some feel measurements above a zip cord are not in their best interest so we have that. Again, we all will have to decide, even with the current cable’s, how far we go with calculated and measured variables. My job is simply to extend the option with real science. That’s far from saying everyone needs it. I guess I’m not so good at sales. The product has to do that based on how it works. It doesn’t need me after I design it, the physics does the sales job when you hook it up.
Best,
Galen
3 Likes
Okay.
Still Galen I’m surprised you haven’t yet made at least a prototype with full silver conductors. From SPTPC it’d be the next logical step up.
(Yes, optimized for the silver of course.)
…or do you in reality have rhodium-plated molybdenum ultra-secret personal prototypes in your system!? Joke, but those would be interesting.
1 Like
This statement is that based on personal preference rather than physics? Would that be for reasons such as systems having the ability to discern details? Or are There other distinct reasons your new cable technology wouldn’t work based on different amp, preamp, or speaker topology or design?
1 Like
Depends on what you are doing on metal choice. For Audio, silver has issues most don’t address like Vp coherence that is controlled with resistance. And, current coherence is addressed with copper wire size. If we look at the data off WILKIPEDIA table, we see that silver is WORSE than copper in getting the same current through the wire, and will need to have a smaller diameter wire to achieve the same current coherence and that smaller wire will DETRACT from the resistivity advantage. Copper is better at achieving time coherence for a given same same sized wire. Resistance is hardly an issue with analog audio in most systems.
Look at Aluminum, it kicks butt on skin depth wire efficiency. It is 26% more efficient than copper. A aluminum wire that is LARGER can be used to offset the DCR increase, but than we lose the skin depth advantages. We can use MORE wires to offset the DCR and try to keep the skin depth efficiency. Keep the wire smaller and aluminum work hardens rather quickly and can break in smaller AWG sizes, so we have that to think about. Small aluminum wires are a real issue for fracturing.
And, resistance is passive at such low frequencies and more linear than Vp differential. I’ve opted to address what I feel is worse, and that’s the Vp differential with frequency. The metal DCR also comes into play with Vp linearity that likes a higher resistance to improve that attributes coherence. The lower graphs show how Vp changes with frequency and the EQUATION tells us that resistance is an important attribute to manage. A 0.0126" 28 AWG aluminum wire acts like a 0.010" 30 AWG copper wire for current coherence through the wire but it is still more fragile in work hardening by far.
We can’t change the low frequency Vp too much near DC where Vp is “zero”. We can alter the curve, or flatten it some at higher frequencies through audio. But the Vp will indeed reach the limiting Vp of the dielectric at RF frequencies…the physics says so. We use C and R to do that.
A more complete picture of everything that is going on needs to be incorporated before we decide what’s best. The more we learn the more we see the difficult balance we have to make to get it “just right”.
Best,
Galen
3 Likes
Vmax,
Nope, not the right way to think of something being a benefit or not. The answer is purely in the math, not the minds eye of preference. ICONOCLAST is about improvements defined by the hard numbers only. That hasn’t changed. The numbers have no preference and just model the way things work assuming we fit the equations to the measurements to capture the physics anyway. We can ignore the numbers for many reasons, cost being one for sure. I’m not going to feelings based improvements, don’t worry.
Best,
Galen
3 Likes
@rower30 haven’t you said there is something coming out that you think will mathematically trump the SPTPC speaker cable?
2 Likes
Stay tuned. More about January.
Best,
Galen
2 Likes
I want to add something to this discussion. I’ve been using SPTPC for over 2 years now. They’re great.
Recently, I’ve been talking to Bob Howard about sending them in for re-termination. I have the old style bananas which aren’t that great.
I removed the Iconoclast speaker cables and inserted some borrowed Canare 4S11 runs between my Parasound JC5 and Focal Sopra 2’s. What a disappointment. There’s a loss of bass definition and extension, midrange clarity, tonal richness, top-end extension.
Honestly, I didn’t know what to expect. Prior to the SPTPC, I had Kimber Monocle XL runs which I owned since 1999. The Canare runs don’t do anything “bad”, but they also don’t do anything well. I guess for $100 for a terminated 8ft pair, they’re a fine enough value but I’m left with that “people don’t know what they’re missing” thought.
5 Likes
The SPTPC cables just don’t do anything wrong. The were my second to last speaker cable purchase and they easily laid waste to anything prior including Shunyata Sigmas. They may actually be better than what I replaced them with. Well too bad.
They are as good as anyone could ever want or need. A bargain as well.
6 Likes
So far we are on schedule for the proper legal stuff to be completed around Xmas, and allow some open discussions to take place. Still looks like the first week in January.
There has been a long and careful process to cover the REASON to design the new product. I think that the end result will be pretty captivating. It is to me and I’m using it. There is a true change for the better, and without that, how can it ever possibly sound or work better?
We have used materials that are AVAILABLE first, we have that. COVID has messed up the supply chain all the way back to dirt. All bases covered isn’t like it used to be but…we adapt and move on. A tough year all around for development.
More important is thank you for trying a pure engineering based set of electrical. Can this be a better approach as long as we stick to calculation and measurement over all else? One advantage, we aim to be as honest about what is real and true to be represented in the designs. That it. We have no other reason to be except that.
One last “note”, we are looking at making the air core XLR more flexible with a different fluorocopolymer jacket, one with a more lenient flex modulus but still extremely UV resistant. It will also address the opacity around the cable where the tint can look really cool, but it can vary in translucency if the wall is even just 2-mil different around the cable. The new jacket will be more opaque, deleting the small wall variation translucent issue. No change at all in how the cable works electrically.
This won’t be a night and day thing but we still have to try to address customer request the best that we can. Until we do that, WE are the problem and we get that. A change can be done to move the needle in a couple of sore spots for the ICONOCLAST XLR so we are on it! Most won’t need the change but…if even a few are helped out we’re going to help out!
Best,
Galen Gareis
11 Likes
Very psyched!!!
Okay then, I splurged and the TPCs are incoming.
Bob Howard said I’m the FIRST to order from Finland. I am honoured - though on the flip side would love to have more global attention to Iconoclast. Let’s… Put up a global campaign to expose the ingenuosity of Iconoclast to the world! If Iconoclast was a big, massive, capable band and known across the globe, I think…
I think… Seriously, and sorry Siltech, not mocking but I don’t think anyone wants the 50k$ Triple Crown cable when people realize it’s simply behind in important geometric aspects. If there IS an optimum for EM geometry, it’d have to at least resemble current Iconoclast because it’s so fiercely optimized.
Siltech uses thick solid core (monocrystalline, yes yes…) silver in some geometry they don’t explicitly demostrate but it’s apparent that it isn’t especially intricate. Why thick silver? If you want thick, use copper, right, because better transmission of power despite resistivity due to properties including diamagnetic characteristics which influence skin depth, so on. Heard from Galen.
No Siltech hate but it’s a matter of them declaring the ultimate cable, when Galen has succesfully made us a clearly more sensible one for… About… ~20x less money. Right. Great!
So… My previous and current cables are very, very, basic, though the QED XT is braided exceptionally well for its inductuve character - just too bright for my current setup. Basic they are, in the sense that they are singular conductors in an outer dielectric.
Never tried any fancy or just exceptionally good speaker cables… So I am expecting a HUGE transition! In EVERY aspect.
(I’ve thus far been enjoying nice interconnects, I felt them more important as a basis for good sound!)
Of course it did say 3-5 business days… Is that even possible nowadays from USA->Finland? Expecting a few weeks… Weeeellll…
8 Likes
@Somppsa is in Finland using Iconoclast. But you are sure to enjoy your cables.
1 Like
Could you describe quite explicitly, your view of what to expect when changing from affordable but good cables to the best cables?
Note: My Audio Physics are very sensitive to all cable changes, they yelled at me loud and nasty with a Zu silver RCA from DAC, but they sang pretty when that Zu RCA was connected to the phono pre. The DAC likes the Signal Cable RCAs.