Audio Bacon’s new review out on Iconoclasts different versions. Good writing as always.
1 Like
Here is the link below and of course the update one from Lon below. It is a great read. Galen impressing the ear camp as opposed to the science camp… well done…
2 Likes
There’s also this second update review: https://audiobacon.net/2019/05/27/iconoclast-cables-same-measurements-different-sound/
I posted links to both on the Hoffman thread.
2 Likes
Greek medical scientist and philosopher Claudius Galen, physician to Marcus Aurelius and other Roman Emperors, discovered that blood circulates in the arteries.
Our modern-day Galen has refined how electricity and audio moves in cables. Coincidence? I think not! ; )
5 Likes
Hi iron,
The dielectrics act as “individuals” with their own personalities. Each insulation will exhibit differing swept values across the frequency ranges, low and high.
The DIFFERENCE between frequencies at audio PREVENT cable from being made perfectly. The self inductance of wire is different at every frequency through the audio band. This self inductance property makes a wire look more resistive in the center verses the outer circumference. This is why the signal “cheats” it’s way towards the wires surface to escape that resistance. Electricity is always going to use the easiest way down the wire.
Since music is a variety if fundamentals and frequencies, we know they don’t all arrive at the same time, and relative to music launched into air. We measured it indirectly through the dielectrics changes.
We can’t speed the bass frequencies up from 5% to 10% so you align the higher frequecies down, yes? Still, at 50 to 60% Vp they are far removed from “near” the low frequencies at 5-10%, yes? Say yes! because this is the case.
The use of AIR actually speeds things up, the opposite what we want, on higher frequencies and on down the frequency line. Current coherence, using smaller wires aligns primarily the higher frequency ranges and can not really improve alignment to the bass frequencies…too much difference to overcome. We hear a better level of edge detail and connectedness listening to music with better and better coherence. But, it is mostly the higher frequencies this impacts.
Different dielectric will change the slope of the dielectric’s curve across frequency so just how much of the current coherence is heard will be different, by design…not magic.
You can’t do physics wrong per say as physics will do “A” even if you thought it would do “B”. What you can do, is interpret what makes the physics change to better suit your desired outcome better and better. The use of current coherence was a real pain, but it kept saying, audibly, that it is the right thing to do. Air dielectric was confusing as it sounded better, but did the opposite of theory for total time alignment.
Once I realized getting it closer to right at JUST the higher frequency end was the actual outcome we hear it made more sense.
The Re resistance curves also remained flatter up higher than before so we gained “bandwidth” over single large wires of the same area. There is a natural connection to current coherence as Rs charts are a superposition of attenuation, skin effect and proximity effect all at once. Get it closer to right and we get a wider linear region of operation. We can definitely measure the effects.
Some will argue each of these changes can’t be heard. Too small. I use the real units so scale is not hidden away. I don’t say ten times bigger without the numbers for proper scale and magnitude.
Here is the rub, to make stuff better we have to reference calculation and measurement. Invent ways to verify improvements, Rs as an example, and repeatability by anyone doing the tests. The cables are indeed better, all of them. That is what is sold…and the judgements I made aligning the physical properties to do so. This is shown by how they measure. If I screw up, the measurements STILL do not lie! They are what the cable is, not my thoughts. The cables are repeatable by DESIGN.
How does all this tweaking, and it is tweaking like it or not as hard as it is to do, sound when we use it? I can’t sell that…There is no reference. Speaker cables see a more dynamic load variation into a speaker than interconnects do into a 47 kohm resistive load so speaker cable will vary more. They both will vary from other designs and that variation is why you buy them.
One little question can merge into an eight land freeway that is near impossible to get off! Sorry about that. I hope the ride was worth it. I now return you to you regular road.
If you have ideas on how all this interfaces together by all means chum in at any frequency. I am hardly the last best place to stop. My intent is to MOVE where we stop to a more accurate place for audio cables. This is more than just me.
Best,
Galen Gareis
badbeef,
I have his book, and that dude made a lot of mistakes so I think you are right, there are a lot of similarities!
I figured you would get back at me for saying you think like Gary Bussy, and you did great!
Seriously though, I just used measurements and such to define if what I think is happening DOES happen. I round up all the verifiable geometries and learn to use them in such a way so as to not trample some other important aspect. Everything is important but you soon figure out physics does not like a peg pounded all the way down unless something dramatic happens to all the other pegs concurrent. Those other pegs require a lot of work, and don’t move for free.
All the changes are connected to each other through the DESIGN of the cables. That means poor interpretation of what a measurement means and does is definitely my fault. An attenuation VALUE is not the REASON for that value. Figuring out why the measurement value happens, and slowly proving it, is the hard part. The tool isn’t the measurement, it is the understanding why it happens. I wish I knew more.
Thx badbeef,
Galen
2 Likes
There’s an addendum review that includes insight between the different variants for anyone curious:
4 Likes
Thank you Siao and Jay for another sterling review on Iconoclast. Glad to see the other copper variants covered. Your perceptions are very accurate though most prefer the SPTPC on speaker leads. The OFE variant that Jay prefers presents a warmer presentation that some sincerely love. Again, sometimes system dependent. We always encourage customers to try more than one variant before making a decision when possible. No risk in listening. Your site is beautiful and growing like crazy! Your reviews are so well written, images beautiful and give the reader the whole picture. Thank you again!!
Bob
2 Likes
Hello Blue Jeans Bob and Galen
Question: Would you recommend that all IC’s be uniform materials or is it ok, to have a mix of OFE and OCC?
1 Like
Ron,
I have not had a bad mix in my two systems, C4 and CLX. There is a best preference but I designed the line to be a big value with TPC. The 4x4 XLR TPC, to my ear, is better than the 4x1 XLR UP OCC as the added soundstage precision outweighs the slightly more uniform tonal balance in the 4x1 design. Yes, that’s a preference I agree.
The Audio Bacon review is spot on, the UPOCC present a slightly more continuous tonal balance top to bottom.
The TPC and SPTPC are livelier, quicker and separate the musical events more than the OFE, which are richer in bass balance and have a larger center image. This, with just the copper change.
This is still a preference. I use CLX speakers and the added resolution and edge detail are welcome! The same speaker and a different owner will chose differently.
Always try the lower cost option to evaluate the differences. Don’t edge your purchase past enjoying it.
Good question Ron,
Galen
@siao-jer - you didn’t try the TPC speaker cables? They were what I ended up choosing amongst the three for my system, despite peer pressure to prefer the SPTPC ; )
2 Likes
When I compared the three speaker cables, SPTPC was almost too much of a good thing. After a while, listening just got fatiguing. My preference for long term listening was the OFE, but my preference for a “WOW” rush was the SPTPC.
Now there are other ways to deal with fatigue. Sometimes the most transparent components highlight an opportunity elsewhere in your system for tuning and hygiene.
That being said, I find myself (like Jay) to usually lean toward copper over silver. I’d love to hear what OCC would do in a speaker cable. Is there a way to get the remarkable detail and holographic imaging of SPTPC, while keeping that “this just feels right” feeling of the OFE?
If the Iconoclast team needs a beta tester, sign me up for a 6’ pair! 
1 Like
I never had any pressure from my peers, just the usual concern for my sanity–“you’re spending what on what???”
But the SPTPC just had that little something that presented itself in my system as a positive effect on the soundstage, that appeared/disappeared/appeared with the change of material. And while I can’t sort this out in my head, they seemed distinctly faster. As my gf would say, “that’s cray cray”.
2 Likes
@ray-dude - I first tested the SPTPC for a few weeks (Tyr2 replacement) and it was WOW and not fatiguing over two weeks with extended listening. Very real and coherent SS. However, when I then replaced my Valhalla 2 XLR (DSD & BHKPRE) w/ (2) pair of OCC (3ft/5ft) in addition to SPTPC speaker cables (8ft) it was like holy crap! HOLY CRAP!.. $hit, now I have to sell the Nordost… Right out of the packaging, no burn in time required… the real SQ bang is the OCC XLRs, that is the money swap… the SPTPC was great, the OCC XLR was the money…
1 Like
From a friend whom I talked into Iconoclast.
“I lent some iconoclast to my buddy to try. He has black cat coppertone. This is his response.”
“I hate you.”
4 Likes
@wglenn - yeah, got to watch what you A/B… can make you a hater… I wish I never did this A/B financially and glad I did it sonically. Once you get a taste of a real/coherent sound stage and what it should sound like, it is all over but the crying…
What was it that @badbeef said? “Once you hear it, your screwed.” 
3 Likes
@ray-dude
Could you refresh us on what your system is comprised of? Especially amplification and speakers.
@wglenn - you know, sometimes you A/B and go… “well, I don’t know, let me hear it again…” this just smacks you in the mouth, you can’t use “private don’t know” it is that clear. However, I have felt zero ear fatigue w/ SPTPC. As a matter of fact, I have yet to hear a really bad album. In addition, it has me listening to my DMP 25+% which I was writing that off months ago… to prove my point. Since I set my system up last May, 2018, I bought about (6) CDs & SACDs. Two weeks ago I bought (40) CDs and last week another (40) CDs. The CD red book sound amazing.
1 Like
@cardi
What was the one thing (or two) that the OCC XLRs did for tthe sound? More open, more focused, better sound stage and image placement, better tonality, beter top to bottom frequency response. The reason I ask as my experience with Nordost Tyr version 1 was hyper detail, like putting the upper midrange (presence region) under a microscope.