Hey, that’s great! @rower30, @BobBJC, either of you going to be there?
Bob’s got leg surgery to recover from and I’ll have that heart shunt issue being resolved, too. So we have old guy health stuff to knock back during the show.
I would go for sure if it weren’t for the arrythmia monitor I’ve got glued to my chest for 30 days and the shunt closure surgery stuff after that’s done.
The tumor has been considered mostly inoperable but…if it doesn’t grow I’m good. It’s just “there”. If it does grow too big, well, it is grown into the skull bones and has also grown around a vessel in my brain so it can’t be removed fully, hence mostly inoperable but just mitigation if needed. Take out what they can and radiation on what remains. So best action for now is zero as long as possible. The removal mitigation isn’t worth the risk now.
Still, the tumor may be a super slow grower and no big deal if it is. MRI’s every six months and then every year if it is stationary. That’s the hope anyway. Mitigation with surgery is worse than I thought but that’s the way it rolls sometimes. It seems to be a calcium type tumor which grow very slowly. That’s good. There are as many as 30 types of menengiatic tumors making it’s a hard call.
Best,
Galen
10 Likes
Best wishes to you both. May you both have the best outcomes possible. I do recall Bob talking of leg surgery last we chatted.
3 Likes
second that
1 Like
You two have much more important things to deal with! Both of you take care!
1 Like
Hi All, so sorry for the delayed responses!!! We are indeed going to be at the Capitol Audio Fest and in a listening room with Rich Pinto of Treehaus Audiolab. Rich will have his speakers and components with a full loom of Iconoclast cables including the Series II SPTPC speaker cables as long as the gremlins stay away. Everything is looking 100% go at this point. I’m a speaker nut and thought I’ve not personally heard Rich’s system I’m impressed with what I see and with what I hear in our conversations.
Both Galen and I are on the road to recovery or so it seems but rather than to take chances. we have enlisted the boss himself to work with Rich at the Capitol Audio Fest. Thank you Rich for inviting us to join with you. Thank you Kurt for saying that you would go!!
Kurt is the force behind Blue Jeans Cable making this BJC/Iconoclast marriage made in Heaven happen and is one of the finest persons you will ever meet. He is quite technical, but of course not at the same level as Mr. Gareis. Kurt will certainly hold his own against most!
Please come visit and say hello to Rich and Kurt and know how much we appreciate every one of you!!
Kurt is at this moment, somewhere over the big pond on the way to the UK for an audio show of some sort. He is on a fact finding mission for next year.
Series II SPTPC is around the corner…
8 Likes
Great stuff! That room is on my list!
1 Like
Medicine can be weird. The corrective action for the right to left shunt isn’t really for my condition, It is more for thjose that have severe oxygen uptake conditions, that I do not. How do we know that?
Out of a 1000 person universe, 10 had strokes in five years with just low does aspirin.
Out of a 1000 person universe, 6 had strokes in five years with low dose aspirin AND the shunt repair.
A difference of just 4 strokes (0.04% of 1000). Look too that that means 6 strokes are from issues that are NOT from the shunt! The shunt prevented just 4, or 40% of the total strokes but 40% of near nothing.
Add the significant possible complications to the risk to gain just 0.04% benefit with an asymptomatic (no O2 issues) shunt. Also, a T and F test may show the difference in the test outcome is not real, but the results can switch the next time the test is run under a gauge R and R calibration (press the button again and see if the outcome is the same). The numbers are so close and few in number that the variation in the two test conditions can overlap! Short story, no difference at all.
This means I take low dose aspirin every day for the rest of my life and move on. The shunt fix is for far larger problems than I have. I just wish the medical community explains all this before I research it and figure it out.
The tumor is an issue if it grows, true. So far, the odds are it will NOT, I hope, grow.
The SPTPC series II cable is moving along through the plant. Preliminary tests have been superb…well, what I designed them to be.
ITEM NO: 71552Y (Y67703)
Cap @ 1 kHz – 60.7793pF/ft
Ind @ 1 kHz – 0.05823uH/ft
The cap is used to adjust the low frequency impedance and high frequency Vp. Each wire is 28 AWG, and that helps adjust the same two things as it is an R*C in the equation. Better to use R more than C so C is tweaked up less than I adjusted the R (most neutral attribute to move).
When we do an open-short impedance test, best for low frequency impedance, we see that a good bit lower impedance is tested over a zip cord. This bundles all the changes up for a true look at what happens in numbers. Did it even work?
Don’t ignore that a cable impedance has to rise to infinity at DC! Yep, it’s not working the way we want it to sorry to say. As Vp goes to zero, DC has infinity resistance to AC (duh!). We can tune it lower but not against mother nature. At some point is won’t respond as it is a LOG function. Put a lot in and get nothing back in return at some point. Anyone who says they have eight ohms cable at 20 Hz isn’t being honest. Ask for the open short impedance test to prove it.
Phase goes to theoretically zero at RF. Impedance is SQRT (L/C) and the L and C angles offset each other at RF, leaving an angle less number, or a pure resistance. At the cable’s resonant frequency, the capacitive and inductive reactance cancel, and the reactive part of the antenna impedance is 0 ohms. This is an ideal situation where the cable and load are optimally matched. We can’t do that at audio as Vp changes the impedance at every frequency.
At low frequency phase goes to a maximum as the L goes away and we have just the C, or a 45-degree phase shift at DC, and a slope from zero phase at RF to a max at DC through the audio band. You’ll see phase at 20 KHz as that’s where it is the “best”. Ignore that, please. We have this phase issue through all our equipment, it can’t be removed as L and C vector angles (impedance) put it there. We have a reactive match at audio to a changing load with a changing cable reactance, there is no other way.
We can put two cables in parallel and drop the L and R even more, like about half. The cap will double so we need to keep it reasonably low and lengths in check. The 65 pF or so cap isn’t high enough to cause issues except in the most sensitive amplifiers. Be aware some speaker cables sold are near 2,000 pF/foot! Those need reactive offset ZOBEL networks to work well. L is low but C is massively high. The cable designs are
really a long capacitor on your amp/speaker. Again, no magic here.
The benefit of using some C, is that we reduce the L, and we want that in speaker cables. Are we accurate to four places? No, we can hit the button and we’ll be accurate to the first decimal place. As we physically move the UTP speaker cable, the variables will geometrically change some as the ends are six inches long for termination and are moving some. That alters the total L and C. More the shorter the total length.
I have no magic wand for L and C except to keep the ends snug as you can technically make the L and C closer to the bulk cable.
We have a paper with actual measurements with parallel speaker cables for those that want to see the real deal.
ICONOCLAST sells the actual calculations and data and feel that better audible performance if it can be obtained from those improvements will indeed follow. It has to be designed better to sound better, yes? The papers are about how ICONOCLAST is better.
Best,
Galen
9 Likes
Great news. Be well.
1 Like
Thanks for the updates on your health and the cable production!
My wife had a similar health issue after a blood clot stroke. She has a couple of aneurysms in a difficult area to shunt.
The chance of death from the procedure itself is in the 4% neighborhood and there is a distinct possibility that during the procedure she will stroke again due to the small size of the arterys involved.
Seeing as there is no way to tell how long the aneurysms have existed and they have not appreciably increased in size over the last year she has decided to not have the repairs done which I am glad of.
The doctor of course wants to strut his stuff and try the repairs but the answers is no.
2 Likes
Galen it never hurts to challenge the doctors. Engineers always come prepared to understand the diagnosis and next steps.
Do the SPTPC series 2 numbers above differ any from The TPC series 2 ?
Yes, electrical are different. The series I speaker cable are designed to a far better cost center. 12 wire instead of 24 in a polarity. The series II are just a more expensive choice based on the design cost. The series II IC and speaker cable don’t replace the series I, just allow another step towards perfection. Still, we want to keep manufacturing cost closer to most of our budgets. You can design way up there in cost from here, yes.
series I 45 pF/foot 0.08 uH/foot nominal. DCR per wire 24 AWG * ~ 25 ohm/1000’
series II 65 pF/foot and 0.06 uH/foot nominal. DCR per wire 28 AWG @ ~ 65 ohm/1000’
The R goes up 2.6 times and the C goes up only 1.4 times so we can do parallel just fine for those that want super low L and R cables. C is a problem only if it causes amplifiers feedback circuits to act out. All amplifiers are oscillators with the right reactance. We need to be aware of that. The high frequency capacitive roll-off is in the MHz in the stable amplifier range so you won’t hear that at all. What you do hear, is oscillations caused by too high capacitance. We want to stay well away from that.
Best,
Galen
1 Like
Exactly, and for a 0.04% single run trial. Not worth the risk of the procedure. Data says to chill and take an 80 mg aspirin each day.
Best,
Galen
2 Likes
I did notice you said TPC to SPTPC series II electrical and no, they are the exact same numbers given the STD deviation run to run. Same with the series I. The copper material does not change the electrical R, L and C in the lengths we use.
Best,
Galen
2 Likes
@rower30 @BobBJC - I have spaced out the timeframe for the SPTPC Series II availability. I am working through my next purchase and am thinking speaker cables might be next. I want to see how much more I can get out of my Sopra 2’s before I sell them.
The series II TPC are the plant to put-up! SPTPC are right behind them. We are working out the put-ups. This cable, being all FEP, is HEAVY stuff. You don’t think about it much but a 1,000 foot reel of cable is too heavy to even move.
We’ll get that to a 500 foot put-up like series I, but just because it is a series II design doesn’t mean it is half as heavy.
I know we have been getting the comments to SPREAD the tech out more. The series I and series II do that. We take the series I and STRETCH the tech to a financial limit to maximize the performance.
The series II is a more costly, true, and refined spec version of the series I. Our cable sells on the actual specs, there are real differences, also true. Like most stuff the more expensive design does not mean that’s what we all have to buy.
The reason the series I exists, is to get 80% or more of the DATA on the cable. That metric is really hard to really quantify into the sound. But like it or not the physics says that last 20% (we didn’t really get all of that 20%!) is really costly to get. We get that fact and that’s why we have the series I.
Everyone wanted a “super” version, and that’s fun to do but we all can’t afford that technology. We are absolutely not pricing the more price sensitive audiophile out of this market with the series II. The series I has a proper place for the bang for the buck tech for ICONOCLAST.
The series II, to me, is a costly cable. To make series II reasonable on the far upper end dual bi-wire tech we split it into TWO parallel cables. To get the max, and most costly “version” you parallel them. We have a paper on that. This parallel tech reduces the price initially to half on the most extreme series “III” if you will.
The series I can be parallel in the treble for parallel bi-wire but the tech suggest that a series II is the better “step” than treble parallel series I for full range. The series I Vp and lower open-short impedance stuff in parallel is good for the bass, but the series II addresses the higher frequency range and you can’t get that without more and smaller wires. Application will shift the choices.
For single terminal speakers wire…use; series I, then series II, then series II in parallel in that order for spec based performance. Wire science has to be auditioned. I have no numbers to suggest a meaningful reason one is better or worse than another.
ECONOMY bi wire can use series I bass/treble but if you want to upgrade later, the sereis I in the treble will be replaced with series II. Just be aware of that. There is no reason you can keep the series I bi-wire full range. We all have a budget.
For parallel bi-wire upgrade path…use; series I (bass) series II (treble), then series I parallel (bass) plus series II parallel (treble).
Wire science is still a choice. The series II is really good with TPC too in the treble. Yes, the SPTPC may add to the fun but it won’t be as significant as the series I’s changes with wire science as we are pushing up the technology ladder to diminishing returns. Yep, the math also shows this fact overall. The frequency ends asymtotically converge on DC (no Vp) and RF (Vp limited by the dielectric). There is no getting around how much we can tune the middle range with smaller and smaller wire size. Don’t forget, you need to do that with low average capacitance and inductance too. This also gets harder and harder to do with more and smaller wire. Smaller wire by itself isn’t an answer.
Here is my set-up with the SPTPC in the bass (BLUE). The silver isn’t helping here but I had the SPTPC in the system 100% initially as single bi-wire. Why? I cut a damaged series I SPTPC assembly in half and that was my starting place. I have a budget too believe it or not. I switched to the parallel TPC series II (RED) later on for the treble. I just moved the treble SPTPC series l parallel in the bass section! No, I don’t get the cool terminations you all, do. Mine are cost made pre-production samples.
We now have a broader product line and with more application decisions. We are here to help make sure your path is the best for you.
Best,
Galen
4 Likes
Okay what is meant by the teaser here with series III? What does that allude to in design.
When I get a chance with series II SPTPC. I currently use TPC series II and series II jumpers on my Triwire speakers with SPTC series I on bottom. If my mids are 400 to 1300 Hz crossover.
Would a triwire composed of TPC series six foot length II on mid and series II SPTPC six foot length above 1300Hz make sonic sense over the series II SPTPC full wire 6 foot to mid Jumpering the highs from mid with 8 inch SPTPC series II? Do you know what frequencies Silver Plate affects sonically? Or if Triwire offers advantage?
No teaser at all. The final cost of the series II was too, too high so I had to re-engineer it into two parts in parallel. The parallel cable segment halves the inductance and resistance, but C goes up double. This is why I stopped the capacitance on the series II to ~ 65 pF/foot. For 48 wires that’s a really good value. The cross-matrix design keeps the cap in check.
For tri-wire I’d use the series II in the mid and tweeter. Series I on the bass, below around 300 Hz or so. The DCR is lower on the series I with close to the same impedance (graphs). The series II inductance is slightly lower on the series II @ 0.06 uH/foot versus 0.08 uH/foot on the series I.
Could you argue that lower inductance is better? Sure. And with two in parallel the total CMA area is pretty good too, 7632 CMA x 2 = 15264 CMA, or about a 9.5 AWG *(0,123" round equivalent diameter) wire. The deciding factor is still the cost. All series II would be the “best” but the highest price, too. The impedance match is more critical than the AWG DCR and impedance is real close to the same open-short measurements. I changed R and C and the impedance is a ratio of the real to reactive properties at low frequency. The happen to balance out to near the same tested impedance.
The open-short impedance doesn’t drop a lot on the series II as physics says it is a LOG type issue. A LOT of effort provides little gain past a point. The data tells the story. Since the series I is darn near the same impedance as the series II, go with the lower DCR as the impedance, though lower is better, isn’t low enough to matter, and series II costs more. The series II leverages the higher frequency aspects with smaller wire AWG to further flatten the Vp (second chart).
Does all this effort matter? That’s where we need a cable to use and answer that question. So now we have a more fully optimized design, and even farther if we parallel or double bi-wire. The data doesn’t talk or sing though!
Best,
Galen
2 Likes
For those that want the series II papers, just message me at ggareis@iconoclastcable.com.
I’ll attach the .PDF’s for you. Those that want a simple answer probably won’t like the math in the papers so much but that’s how the cables were all made. It isn’t too, too bad to understand but it isn’t sales or marketing, either!
Best,
Galen
2 Likes
New speakers? This is the first I’m hearing (reading) this! DSD MK II is supposed to be next. Stay focused Vince! Lol
1 Like