I’m no better than what I’ve presented and explained that ICONOCLAST is based off of. I wouldn’t say 35 years of apprentiship in an art makes you ultimate anything other than having more and more practical experience to apply and those practices comes from the people around you! I can’t say I found a single solitary new aspect of physics making ICONOCLAST, nope, not a one. I use the physics and the tools to evaluate change prior to design changes to improve the electrical balance. And that’s my definition of where I want the cable measurements to go. Anyone can say that my decision of balance is right or wrong, but it is defined in the design, it won’t change based on opinion. It went where I designed it to go.
One of those tenants is that better DESIGN trumps materials assuming you use a material appropriate for that application. So let’s get closer to how the EM wave responds to the geometry and time based physics. Do we have ways to improve the design? Does a better, more expensive design, although absolutely better in measure and calculation apply in use?
ICONOCLAST is an experiment to provide truthfully better peer reviewed analysis of cables. Do they work in auditioin? We sell the DESIGN and the specifications that a design attains, not the sound. A cable can’t potentially sound better if it isn’t measuring better to known and proper attributes.
ALL Belden design cables attain specific electrical parameters that are better and better but more and more expensive (Ethernet 1200, 2400, 3600 and 4800 cable series as an example). We sell no cable at all based on how colorful a CATV cable is, or how responsive an Ethernet cable is or how beautiful an audio cable sounds. We sell the specifications and those can’t be defined as a sound any more than color or digital responsiveness can define the look or feel of a system. We don’t know digital cable’s specification superiority, but we do feel the web page load time and judge the overall system’s responsiveness.
So no, I don’t think more $$$ copper has the expectation to sound better. Why? Where is the beef that says it has to? We COULD use pure resistivity. Lower is better, to say less grains is a better wire. True. But resistance is a passive attribute to sound. We are sensitive to time based issues more than amplitude. How are those time based variables changed as grains go down?
Please, please remember that we listen to the EM wave traveling down the wire. THAT is our signal. At any point in time all the signals are superimposed on on top of the other and added up. That’s at the staring point of a wire. The PHASE of all those signals is indeed the amplitude of the voltage at that instant. As the voltage goes down the wire, and like a square wave it is really a composition of frequencies and the voltage signal distorts in amplitude and phase at all the frequency’s Vp relative to all the others. This is group delay. This changes the EM wave from it’s input properties. If it doesn’t we have magic wire since all wire is a distortion over time. In the end, of the wire (ha!) we listen to that final EM wave property and what ever changed it enough to hear. Some will argue we change stuff we can’t measure but can hear. Fair enough. I didn’t use that logic making ICONOCLAST is all. My choice.
A lower resistivity wire will have MORE Vp non linearity built into the design as it is in the denominator of the Vp speed equation. That’s worse, not better for that attribute. Is lower resistance worth worse Vp linearity? We could RAISE the capacitance to offset the lower resistance. But higher capacitance impacts amplifier stability some.
Since the real resistance value is so low in our assemblies the change is symantics. What matters is if the conductor material presents a sound that is identified as more enjoyable…or not. ICONOCLAST provide the exact same core cable design across RCA, XLR and speaker differing only by the copper to allow anyone to trial the experiment of what the copper influences. No hidden agenda…the copper has to be different or just buy the cheaper version and even that has to be a better sounding cable than a typical reference design; 1694A, 1800F and 1313A.
Blue Jeans sells ALL the reference designs and you can compare and contrast every cable, RCA, XLR and speaker cables. They all measure differently and use more and more elaborate designs to get those measurements as all the tech papers explain. Is the true electrical benefit on the lab bench better in your system in use? Is 4800 Ethernet cable better than 1200? The specs aren’t the same but how does that translate to in-use differences? The numbers don’t tell you anymore than the current specs on a loudspeaker will until you until you listen to it.
As we learn more we can identify what provides a better EM wave input to output. That’s, of course, that the differences are impacting the needed end point requirements. I provided a series of cables that are better so now customers can really tell with ICONOCLAST why they are better and if that means anything in use. You can look at it as a thumb your nose at expensive cable or the opposite, it supports better cable electrical in audio. They remain electrically better no matter what, and that’s what we sell, but we need better soundings cable not just the specs. For that you have to use them and listen. This is why it is 100% money back no questions asked.
Best,
Galen Gareis
