• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Belden ICONOCLAST XLR Cable Review

Rate this cable

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 152 53.9%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 86 30.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 21 7.4%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 23 8.2%

  • Total voters
    282

srkbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,029
Likes
1,445
Location
Dallas, TX
@beagleman
Imagine a primitive man thousands of years ago sitting under an apple tree and apples start falling down in front of him. He tells his friends that they all fall straight down. No, they say, that's anecdotal, prove it. Anyway, the leaves fall slower and usually sideways. He's not going to wait thousands of years for Newton to explain gravity and wind resistance. He's certainly not going to invent differential calculus as a precursor for explaining the gravitational force. More likely, he'll eat the apples and enjoy them, perhaps put a net under the tree to catch them so they don't bruise or split.

The history of mankind is full of anecdotal experience waiting for an explanation. That's how science works. If you ignore anecdotal experience, progress explaining the physical world will come to an end. Most people pre-Newton would simply have avoided walking under apple trees should apples land on their head, but there would have been a few natural philosophers asking the more fundamental question : why they fell from the tree at all.

I have no skin in the game. My last component system was balanced and I used Mogami 2534 analogue XLR cables at about £15 each. But if people say they hear a difference, good for them, let them enjoy it, I'm sure one day it will be explained one way or another.

I'm no scientist. Galen appears to describe various reactive effects between cables and components. He may be correct that scientifically they do have an impact, but whether and how they may be audible is another matter.
I just got around to reading this. You made a number of whopper arguments throughout this post, and the general tenor I got from your allegory—the one about man’s understanding of the behavior of falling apples “pre-Newton”—is that anecdotes are sometimes the best we’ve got until science comes around to explain things. And since you’re posting it here, I assume this allegory is supposed to pertain to this cable question—as you say, “that’s how science works”.

I appreciate your efforts to educate us here, but the problem is that we’re long past Newton, and the scientific knowledge and relevant instruments to assess this cable question already exist—Amir demonstrated this to us elegantly at the start of this thread. So we aren’t dependent on anecdotes to speculate about differences in cable performance, and even if we were, anecdotes are not science—they’re never science. The thinking behind your argument is what led early man to throw rocks at the sun, and angry villagers in Salem to burn women at the stake. So your assumption that “this is how science works” is unsettlingly false.

I do agree with one claim you made in your argument though, and I highlighted it in bold up there for you towards the end of your comments. Nevertheless I hope you do keep coming back here, because you will learn something if you keep an open mind.
 
Last edited:
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
Philosophically, his approach seems valid: make each component of the chain as good as you can and the total may only be better. That's similar to what you state when saying (my translation): we go for 120dB SINAD, because we know that to achieve that level, you need perfect engineering and execution at all stages, and there is therefore very little chance you could have hidden sins.
I hear you but it is not the same. A better SINAD device can be had with no extra cost (or even a lot of cost savings). And it provides no added inconvenience. Such is not the case with these cables. You pay a lot more for them, and their stiffness and weight causes serious usability issues.
 

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
No. It is two sequential captures of digital to analog and back to digital to see the variability in this process.
I didn't write it correctly ;)
If I'm not wrong, you have:
- an original file (or a sequence of this original file)
- a recorded file with the WBC cable (from playing the original file and recording it via digital->analog->digital loopback)
- a recorded file with the Iconoclast XLR TPC cable (same process)

The second picture is the Deltawave difference between the recorded file with WBC cable and the recorded file with Iconoclast XLR TPC cable.
But what is the first picture?
 

pkane

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
5,626
Likes
10,202
Location
North-East
I didn't write it correctly ;)
If I'm not wrong, you have:
- an original file (or a sequence of this original file)
- a recorded file with the WBC cable (from playing the original file and recording it via digital->analog->digital loopback)
- a recorded file with the Iconoclast XLR TPC cable (same process)

The second picture is the Deltawave difference between the recorded file with WBC cable and the recorded file with Iconoclast XLR TPC cable.
But what is the first picture?

Do you mean this one? It says it right at the top: two consecutive captures nulled against each other, both with WBC cable:

index.php
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
But what is the first picture?
That's what I explained. :) It is a "control" in technical terms. I played the digital file through the DAC, WBC cable and ADC. Captured that. Then did it again. Due to noise and varying performance of the DAC & ADC, you still get variations in these two captures even though the hardware is unchanged. Those variations are our baseline. Without it, you don't know if "-115 dB" is a good number or not when comparing two cables.

Indeed, I spend the entire 2 to 3 days trying to get the above consecutive captures of the system to null as deeply possible. I started with as low numbers as -45 dB but by removing variable after variable, I eventually removed enough to get those superb numbers.
 

JP

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Messages
2,273
Likes
2,449
Location
Brookfield, CT
That's what I explained. :) It is a "control" in technical terms. I played the digital file through the DAC, WBC cable and ADC. Captured that. Then did it again. Due to noise and varying performance of the DAC & ADC, you still get variations in these two captures even though the hardware is unchanged. Those variations are our baseline. Without it, you don't know if "-115 dB" is a good number or not when comparing two cables.

Indeed, I spend the entire 2 to 3 days trying to get the above consecutive captures of the system to null as deeply possible. I started with as low numbers as -45 dB but by removing variable after variable, I eventually removed enough to get those superb numbers.

What were the variables that tripped it up?
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
What were the variables that tripped it up?
There were quite a few. I started with using a separate DAC and ADC and long, high resolution clips. And no control of the start/stop points of the recordings. Final solution was to use a single ADC/DAC, use automation to start and finish the clips, reduce bandwidth to audible band and keeping it short. Getting 50 to 60 dB null wasn't hard. Then I got to 90 dB. And eventually to the numbers you see now.

There were a ton of software/driver/hardware configuration issues I had to go through to get it all to work. Final solution was using Adobe Audition in multi-track mode where it can play and record at the same time. And record automation there to stop at the right time.

Keeping the tracks short increased my throughput in trying different things.
 

JP

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Messages
2,273
Likes
2,449
Location
Brookfield, CT
There were quite a few. I started with using a separate DAC and ADC and long, high resolution clips. And no control of the start/stop points of the recordings. Final solution was to use a single ADC/DAC, use automation to start and finish the clips, reduce bandwidth to audible band and keeping it short. Getting 50 to 60 dB null wasn't hard. Then I got to 90 dB. And eventually to the numbers you see now.

There were a ton of software/driver/hardware configuration issues I had to go through to get it all to work. Final solution was using Adobe Audition in multi-track mode where it can play and record at the same time. And record automation there to stop at the right time.

Keeping the tracks short increased my throughput in trying different things.
Windows? IIRC I got better than -100dB initial try with ADI-2 Pro FS R on Mac. Fortunate I started with that config. Nulling Pi DACs with a separate ADC was far, far worse.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2022
Messages
57
Likes
95
Location
Earth
WHAT?! I thought it was a year and didn't know that cables were specifically "lifetime", hmmm, ironically, I know Hobie - I should've just emailed him LOL. Ok, I'm back on the monoprice bandwagon and will just accumulate XLR cables for replacement.

Yeah, I do disconnect frequently, not like a roadie, but for microphones and the like.
Yup, but only cables and TV mounts are lifetime - everything else is one year as you thought.
 

Grooved

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
441
Do you mean this one? It says it right at the top: two consecutive captures nulled against each other, both with WBC cable:

index.php
That's what I explained. :) It is a "control" in technical terms. I played the digital file through the DAC, WBC cable and ADC. Captured that. Then did it again. Due to noise and varying performance of the DAC & ADC, you still get variations in these two captures even though the hardware is unchanged. Those variations are our baseline. Without it, you don't know if "-115 dB" is a good number or not when comparing two cables.

Indeed, I spend the entire 2 to 3 days trying to get the above consecutive captures of the system to null as deeply possible. I started with as low numbers as -45 dB but by removing variable after variable, I eventually removed enough to get those superb numbers.

OK, thanks to both of you ;)
After checking, I understand now that I've read twice the description of the second picture twice, that's why I didn't understand why two were needed
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,521
Likes
37,050
I think people who haven't done much nulling fail to appreciate just how little it takes to ruin a null. Therefore fail to appreciate how deep a null of -100 db or more really is. Also fail to appreciate that a result like Amir has in these cables really leaves no room for some mysterious effects. This is also the kind of test which would uncover differences even if we don't know what they are at first.
 

don'ttrustauthority

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
377
Not wanting to get into some battle of semantics or OF proof....but....
I was asking for you to prove it TO ME, that you heard some difference.
More than an anecdotal experience......

Ya, know, more along the lines of, have a friend or someone neutral do a semi controlled test and see if you REALLY heard the difference.

Saying you proved it , on an audio forum, but with no controls and a sighted test, are......do not truly qualify as actual proof, ya know??

I simply do not care enough to bother doing a controlled listening test, when I know (for most intents) the outcome will most likely come down to random chance or guessing.
Fine. $500. I can't do a blind test I lack the equipment.
 

srkbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,029
Likes
1,445
Location
Dallas, TX
Fine. $500. I can't do a blind test I lack the equipment.
It’s not about the equipment; all you need for that is an audio setup. What you (and the rest of us) lack is an adequate sample size. For a qualitative endpoint such as sound quality you need a random sample of subjects, a carefully controlled design with blinding of both the subjects and the investigators, and for statistical significance, an adequate number of participants in both arms of the study.

Those numbers are statistically calculated in advance, and for something like this the size of each arm would require quite a bit more than 3 or 4 people—it would likely be at least 20-30 or higher. That’s why we have such little data on listening tests—they’re complex and costly, and the industry for sure doesn’t want anything to do with it.

They rely on the lack of such data to maintain this elusive “X-factor” that allows players like Gareis to say that the benefits of his cables defy measurements. He counts on the role of cognitive bias to keep seducing folks who don’t give credence to evidence, and once those hypnotized consumers have made such a sizable investment, they’re all the more pressured to justify their choices, by repeating the lies that won them over. And of course once they’ve “heard” the magical results of the snake oil, they want to convince others to try it out as well.

Say what you want about this phenomenon being no big deal, but I consider fraud to be worthy of my concern, and I don’t mind exerting some effort to fight it.
 

SIY

Grand Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
10,383
Likes
24,749
Location
Alfred, NY
It’s not about the equipment; all you need for that is an audio setup. What you (and the rest of us) lack is an adequate sample size. For a qualitative endpoint such as sound quality you need a random sample of subjects, a carefully controlled design with blinding of both the subjects and the investigators, and for statistical significance, an adequate number of participants in both arms of the study.

Those numbers are statistically calculated in advance, and for something like this the size of each arm would require quite a bit more than 3 or 4 people—it would likely be at least 20-30 or higher. That’s why we have such little data on listening tests—they’re complex and costly, and the industry for sure doesn’t want anything to do with it.

They rely on the lack of such data to maintain this elusive “X-factor” that allows players like Gareis to say that the benefits of his cables defy measurements. He counts on the role of cognitive bias to keep seducing folks who don’t give credence to evidence, and once those hypnotized consumers have made such a sizable investment, they’re all the more pressured to justify their choices, by repeating the lies that won them over. And of course once they’ve “heard” the magical results of the snake oil, they want to convince others to try it out as well.

Say what you want about this phenomenon being no big deal, but I consider fraud to be worthy of my concern, and I don’t mind exerting some effort to fight it.
The stuff about sample size and statistics is a classic “haven’t defined the question being asked.” “Can the poster hear this,” “Can anyone hear this,” and “What proportion of people can hear this” are three separate things with vastly different experimental design requirements to answer them. The poster has everything he needs to answer the first question.
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Fine. $500. I can't do a blind test I lack the equipment.

You mean you lack the motivation, as it isn't as hard as you are trying to make it out to be. I guess it's easier to just keep making unsupported claims.
 

Mnyb

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
2,632
Likes
3,592
Location
Sweden, Västerås
The null test really tells the whole story , where should "it" hide , the mystical elusive factor that only exists in anecdotes or uncontrolled testing ? why is the tread continuing ? If there is no difference there is no difference, per definition ?
 

Geert

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
1,936
Likes
3,516
why is the tread continuing

Because someone likes to add to the confusion by discussing audible differences of other cables (speaker cables of different gauge).
 

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,156
Likes
1,576
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
You mean you lack the motivation, as it isn't as hard as you are trying to make it out to be. I guess it's easier to just keep making unsupported claims.


For ME, anyways, I have done what I call a few blind tests, but simply by having another person, usually family, change something, without me knowing or being able to see which, A/B is being used.

NOT truly a great test and not definitive, but WOW, it becomes much harder to tell even things I thought were a small amount of change, when I do not know for sure which is being used.

I then listen and see if I can tell for sure. No complicated machines or switchers or anything, but a very rudimentary, can I tell which is which.

To me, it humbles how sure I am about most small to even moderate changes. We are very visual, and rely on "What we see and know" to determine often "What we hear, or imagine we are hearing"
 
Top Bottom