Those speakers look a bit like the Sonus Faber line. I really liked the craftsmanship in Sonus Faber speakers, and owned the Extremas for a while. -Very sorry I sold them.
1 Like
I’ve been curious about this myself. I also have an N100H, and the Matrix was inexpensive enough to make it worth a roll of the dice. It did polish off the last bit of “digititis” from streaming sources. So far, so good.
The N100H already runs on a decent linear PS, so the obvious question is whether one of the many outboard add-ons would make a big difference. The power solution waymanchen is using carries a cost of ~$625, over twice the cost of the Matrix itself.
1 Like
do you have pics/specs of all this stuff?
Very interesting! 
The Ultra is an add on filter. It makes a very good sound a little better. So does the SR Orange fuse. You just remove the cover of the Sbooster and change it, very easy. The size is small 5x20mm T250v 630 mA. The 5-6v Sbooster is $359. The Ultra about $100. The fuse $159. Together they make a formidable combination.
4 Likes
In fact I had Sonus Faber Minima Amator just before Diapasons. Both good speakers, but Diapason Adamantes has “bigger” sound. Not easy to capture how beautiful they are without proper light indoors. But they sounds as good as they looks:-)
9 Likes
Here is the Sbooster open while I was changing the fuse. Very easy to change. Also, the Ultra drops 1.0V so make sure you take that into consideration. In addition, adding the Ultra makes great even better.
6 Likes
I am considering to upgrade my AES/EBU cable (currently using Audioquest Carbon) between Matrix and Lyngdorf amp. Some decent mid range (max. 500€ /1m ) preferably silver conductor cable.
So far I am considering:
- Wireworld Micro-Platinum Eclipse 8
- OYAIDE AR-910 XLR
Any recommendation?
@rkosak Check out the Iconoclast thread on the forum. @rower30 the designer of the ICs can update you. Their website offers trial. @BobBJC for a cable to try.
2 Likes
For AES/EBU use the GEN 1 series as they are the correct AES/EBU impedance. GEN II series is made for ANALOG performance.
The TPC version is designed for VALUE and the BER, Bit Error Rate, is not altered by the copper draw science at all. For ANALOG, not digital, the copper, or silver, draw science can influence the sound patina.
Silver will have zero performance impact, good or bad, on digital BER for AES/EBU frequencies, so it is not a requirement. The skin depth, current coherence and such are not relavent to AES/EBU digital systems. DCR is not significant in a typical patch systems less than 100 feet or more for digital AES/EBU. Lower RF attenuation requires much higher frequencies to be useful (above 5 GHz). And, at this point it is a SKIN, not solid.
Look for the proper Impedance and associated R, L and values appropriate for digital. Higher velocity dielectrics allow a lower cable capacitance. ICONOCLAST uses a special AIR CORE dielectric with a 87% VP value for low capacitance and proper impedance for AES / EBU digital and ALSO for ANALOG in pro applications (BAV design cable).
Best,
Galen Gareis
Iconoclast Design Engineer
5 Likes
Hi Galen. Does this mean that when using an Iconoclast GEN 1 as a three-foot AES/EBU digital cable, there is no sonic difference between ETPC and OFE? Thanks very much.
You can prove it to yourself…we have the same cable with just different copper…wink, wink! Seriously, try it and see. We offer all the copper choices for the ANALOG users, not the DIGITAL side. Here, I say use the TPC. But still, listen and see.
But yes, digital is based on BER factors that are influenced by the coppers attenuation (small in our case) and wire size (more important) in the PROPER design (most important). At RF the copper isn’t the same set of issues as it is at analog. All three coppers will test exactly the same for digital BER.
The digital conversion to a one or zero isn’t influenced by the copper, but the BER rate based on the signal to noise ratio. For Ethernet, this is called ACR, Attenuation to Cross talk Ratio.
For analog, the EM wave is influenced by the copper structure, some say exceeding little, but that is what changes what we hear. The superimposed outer EM wave comprised of the differing phonon paths to the outer field around the wire where they sum to make the final EM field.
Digital isn’t influenced by that geometric “difference” caused by wire grains or distance to the wire surface as the BER is what determines if the EM wave is reprocessed as a one or a zero. The digital signal is messy at the NIC card input yes, but error correction and such formats it to the correct one or zero. We don’t “hear” what the messy looking spectral energy is on the cable but the “converted” digital signal from that transmission. Streaming errors will certainly cause those POPS or CLICKS we hear sometimes if a play forward mask is too short (keep playing what came before the data dropped out, masking the data loss).
Noise in the system can cause the DA conversion to alter what we hear, but this isn’t the ones and zero’s being wrong, it is the “noise” floor being added to the digital signal when it becomes analog again. This can be RF, HUM and any modulated information that isn’t in the DA process. This is what all the ISOLATION fuss is about, mitigating the path that the analog noise can take and get onto the DA output process, or anywhere we have alien analog. Analog just keeps adding up the noise and once it is in the signal, it is near impossible to get it out again. Digital can remove the noise.
Best,
Galen Gareis
7 Likes
Hi Galen, thanks very much for the detailed response! One more question if I might: Iconoclast GEN 1 XLR or Belden BAV XLR for a three-foot AES/EBU digital cable . . . any sonic differences? Thanks.
1 Like
Should we rename the title of this thread to Ask Galen Vol. II?
2 Likes
Call it anything (but please don’t call it collect or late for supper). 
Call it the Bootzilla gift. 
If you know this thread’s history and have read the first few communications, you know I kid. But, yes definitely, Bootz and many others have been great contributors.
Chas
3 Likes
Miles 1970, I can’t help but wonder what a small venue star, thought about appearing outdoors in front of a few hundred thousand fans?
Chas
The 12V LPSs from China came amazing difference running my Netgear Modem Router and one on SGC i5 compared to switching supplies they came with. The distance between instruments and soundstage depth and width are now incredible. I bought two different models Thee Toroidal works best on The i5 and R core on modem for most realistic live sound. I listened to a recording of a friends A Cappella group. I know his voice and saw show live dead ringer acoustics and singer voices. https://www.voicesoffortworth.com/
and this R Core is best on the NetGear. Soundstage loses depth Sounds flatter if switched between units. So not sure what supply is better just the electronics have preference. But there is a tremendous difference on order of usage. The units are built well. Awesome value.
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/e11412.m5218.l2649/7?euid=263e538b54634bb886d27164b6295ddd&bu=44194831937&loc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fi%2F121996730768%3F_trksid%3Dp11412.c100696.m5037%26_trkparms%3Daid%3D333200%26algo%3DCOMP.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20171011194132%26meid%3D1df919ea78df40c3ae2067cc02483597%26pid%3D100696%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D4%26b%3D1%26sd%3D322109337787%26itm%3D121996730768%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D11412&exe=23694&ext=61076&es=0&nqc=AAAAAAAAAACAAACAAgAEQAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAEAAAAAAAEAACgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAQAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAQA**&nqt=AAAAAAAAAACAAACAAgAEQAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAEAAAAAAAEAACgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAQAAAIAAEAAAAAAAAAIAAAAAQA**&ec=1&sojTags=es=es,nqc=nqc,nqt=nqt,ec=ec,exe=exe,ext=ext,bu=bu
For digital, no big difference.
Here is why, the L and C are identical and that defines the impedance for higher modulated RF digital. The wire structure and material dissipation factor and loss tangents isn’t “heard” like analog as we always error correct the digital mess at the end of the cable to a one or zero, negating that wire influence on the “signal”. It is removed at the end of the cable and converted BACK to a one or zero. Analog doesn’t do that, it “keeps” the signal plus all the EM wave distortions caused by the wire’s structure and materials. For analog, everything matters to an extent since we can’t “remove” the cable’s influences. With digital we do by default. That’s why digital is so great, we don’t care about the noise UNTIL the ACR ratio is too crappy to see the digital in the noise.
Digital cables sounding different? That has to do with how much noise gets onto the ANALOG side of the DA conversion. A digital error correction circuit is too dumb to make anything but a one or zero, and the voltage that defines it. It can’t make a “different” one or zero. If we hear a difference between cables it is usually how NOISE is moved into, around and onto the analog signal.
The less common, now-a-days, issue is how external RF can change a digital CLOCKS ability to keep time properly, called jitter. Good digital clocks are way better at jitter, but as Ted Smith can attest, we hear jitter far more than we might think as it is a TIME based issue our ears are sensitive to by design.
RF getting into the system can also alter the interpolation error when a set of pulses is converted to an anlog wave form. The “error” of the DA interpolation to hit the voltage level dead nuts, too soon, too late or too high or too low, is also jitter and is time based. The more bits of resolution the more likely we are to hit the right value and the smaller the “segment” period we are converting also increases the odds of hitting the voltage value dead nuts so each data point makes a smooth analog “curve” when we’re all done.
Both the ICONOCLAST and BAV use the exact same SHIELD and have the exact same UNBALANCE error percent so external noise entering the system will be the same so jitter type RF will technically have to be the same, as will analog superposition noise in the analog stages if it gets there.
Does that help explain WHY my answer is no, it shouldn’t make a difference for digital, and why we made the BAV cable as well as the different ICONOCLAST cables?
BAV 4x1 (four wires each made of one wire) XLR - flex durabiluty and digital and analog performance.
ICONOCLAST 4x1 - Digital and analog, extended environmental UV material durability over flex with fluorocopolymer which yields the lowest material superposition effects possible for analog. They won’t impact short reach digital much at all, Teflon offering lower attenuation at WAY high frequencies as the loss tangent is low and that need LONG, LONG lengths to be of any value.
Try one of each and report back. They should be so close to the same digital performance to be simple gauge R and R repeatability in the manufacturing process even between two of the same cable. If you want to feel that digital is better in a few feet with TEFLON 4x1 XLR, by all means get it but I’d suggest an evaluation first. The difference really? The TEFLON will out last olefins especially in UV exposure and act the same at super extreme temperatures (-40 F and up to 200 F).
For analog ALL the material and design issues are stored in the end product signal and can’t be “removed” with a 0 or 1 conversion and essentially start over again.
Hope this isn’t TMI and it helps explain my thought process based on the data. This stuff is true for all cables.
Best,
Galen Gareis
5 Likes
Thanks very much, Galen, I just ordered a 3-foot BAV XLR. I will compare it to my current BJC 1800F-based AES/EBU and then decide whether to try an ICONOCLAST GEN1 XLR.
1 Like
Thank you for the explanations. Based on what you said, I’m guessing all other factors being equal, there is no reason to suspect different metals (special copper or, say, silver) to affect a digital signal -certainly not the digital signal, but likely not the “noise” either. Yes?
1 Like