Herman, the genius comes from the use of innovative circuit topologies but it is true that in general audio circuits are simple in general terms compare to complex circuits designs used in control circuits, automations, instrumentation and data acquisition circuits. Those are facts that any competent engineer will tell you.
No, not all circuits sound the same and I agree that great measurements don't always translate to great sound; you are changing the scope of this discussion and are making inferences and allegations that I have not made. So please re-read the post and make notes of my statements before you make these grave assumptions.
As far as ego, I'm dealing with facts. How many audiophiles here have offered their systems to be judged by a "reviewer" like I have here; it is quiet obvious that I'm pretty confident in what I have been able to achieve and where my system and knowledge stands right? Why should I hide the facts?
I have nothing more to say so I will give it a rest and just wait for Ryan to either come over or invite me over to listen to his reference. Then we can start the discussion again with more facts and not assumptions. |
Fred,
When you start recommending $1000 pairs of 6922 tubes and $2,400.00 power cords like you have been doing on this site you really need a reality check; swing by my house and I'll show you what $9 6922 tubes and $5 stock power cords can do when you know a thing or two about sound reproduction, physics, acoustics and electronics. It's time for you to learn a thing or two about the art of sound reproduction. Some of us use more than our wallets to make decisions of what to purchase. The time has come to learn a lesson in stereophonics. |
"A couple thoughts":
Fred, I don't want to come across like I'm picking on you so please don't take it personal but even at $100 per tube it still sounds to me like you and other tube rollers are trying to play an expensive game of trial-and-error "tone control" with these different "Flavor" tubes! It has nothing to do with "Whether the improvement was worth the money is a personal decision that will be different for different listeners", BUT the "approach" that is used to advance ones system to the next level.
The tube rolling is exactly the same kind of silliness as buying or experimenting with the $2,400.00 Acrolink Mexcel 7N copper power cord that you and Rhyno recommend.
Hey this is a free society and everyone is allowed to use their money as they see fit BUT to me it seems foolish to spend these insane amounts of money on trial-and-error "tone control" through tube rolling and power cord selection when there are electronic devices out there which will give you predictable, repeatable, defeatable and scalable tone-control and beyond, per their original design!
My idea of a perfect system always starts with the ability of the system to be neutral and as true/faithful to the "Master Tapes" as possible; from that point on you as an individual are free to tailor the sound of your system according to your personal preferences.
Which is where I'm at, I now have a system that can be adjusted on the fly to cater to "your" idea of the perfect sound or the "Absolute Sound" and which can dynamically/on-the-fly be readjusted to the person next to you idea of perfection.
I believe that a gentleman in my deleted thread said it best:
To some, sound reproduction is a hobby where tube rolling, cable swapping, isolation devices testing and such are fun and exciting but to me it is not only an art BUT a science, which I strive to advance in the level of realism everyday through the use of my knowledge of mastering/recording techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics and electronics.
I'm still hard at work on my book, "The Great Audiophile Swindle!" which will expand further on these thoughts and others. |
You just don't get it! Tweaks such as tube rolling and such are there for the people that want to extract the most out of their system but do not want or have the funds to spend on more expensive solutions, based on substance. In the case of your system, a system with a retail value in the $200K range, tube rolling is out off context! Yes, at the level and the amount of money that you have spent in your system you have systematic solutions based on knowledge and science and you do not need to do the trial and error dance, unless of course you find enjoyment out of it and don't mind blowing your money.
It has become quiet clear and obvious to me that some people bring nothing more to this quest than a big wallet, to those like you and others which do not possess the in-depth knowledge of mastering techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics and electronics may I suggest that you just hire a professional to get you the rest of the way there instead of keeping spending outrageous amounts of money while spinning around and getting nowhere.
This is just my honest and scientifically backed opinion. |
Ralph,
I would agree with you 100% if the reason for swapping the tubes was because of the tubes being microphonic, noisy, suffered from defective construction or were not reliable but I don't believe that is the case here. I believe that Fred just preferred the "Flavor" of the $100 per tube tubes to that of the $19 per tube ones. Perhaps Fred could enlighten us by stating specifically what made the $100 tubes better in his eyes/ears than the $19 tubes? Please let us at the same time know what makes the $2,400.00 Acrolink Mexcel 7N copper power cord better than a $5 stock power cord other than build quality. Please let us know just exactly what it is that this expensive audio jewelry does better than their pedestrian equivalent. I await your answer.
Ralph by the way, I do get what you mean about manufacturers being forced to use mass-produced tubes which leads to the potential to acquire "Better" NOS tubes on the market. The potential is there to get tubes that are less microphonic, quieter, more robustly built and more reliable but it is my view that most tube rollers do not roll for those reasons but for favoring a particular "Flavor" more than other; these is basically trial-and-error "tone control" which is the same practice used in cable swapping and power cord selection. |
Norm,
What is it about the cables and tubes that you prefer and that make them better? Please "verbalize" what makes your choices better?
I do agree that tube technology is different but what matters is the end result isn't it? The way in which a tube is deemed good or no good from a quality control point of view is exactly those parameters which I mentioned above.
Yes Fred doesn't own me any answers but last time I checked this is a "Discussion Forum" and that is exactly what we are doing discussing. For the record, Fred has yet to provide a single answer.
By the way, Professor Luttbeg I used to hold your opinion in high esteem UNTIL you started advocating magic pebbles and teleportation tweaks; from that point on your opinion holds no water for me, and many others.
You have been at this for over 35 years, you would think that you would be smart enough to have figured out that most of what gets peddled as tweaks is nothing more than pseudoscience. |
Norm,
The time has come for the student to teach the professor a lesson. With my last post I set a trap for you. In asking you to verbalize what make a tube or a power cord better than another, you yourself will arrive at the conclusion that the difference in their sound end up being nothing more than mere tone-control: changes to the tonal balance and sonic palette!
It is not that I think that all tubes and power cords sound the same; on the contrary I indeed believe that they sound different and that you and others are indeed hearing a difference. What I content is that these differences can be achieved in a much more elegant way than trial and error. The same end results can be achieved through the use of knowledge of mastering/recording techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics, electronics and the use of high-end studio equipment and techniques which will result in predictable, repeatable, defeatable and scalable phenomena.
You have been at this long enough and I thought that you were smart enough to have figured out that tinkering is one thing but many of these tweaks are nothing more than snake-oil and an audiophile swindle. Come-on is time to take your head out of youre as
.
Norm I think that you will benefit greatly from my upcoming book: The Great Audiophile Swindle!
I will personally sign your copy as you are indeed in need of light being shined on you.
I look forward to continuing my discourse with you here and systematically dismantling each and every one of your views. Lets get it on! |
Ryan,
You are talking to someone with degrees in both Physics and electrical engineering. I believe that you do accounting by profession correct?
As I said in my post above:
It is not that I think that all tubes and power cords sound the same; on the contrary I indeed believe that they sound different and that you and others are indeed hearing a difference. What I content is that these differences can be achieved in a much more elegant way than trial and error. The same end results can be achieved through the use of knowledge of mastering/recording techniques, physics, acoustics, psychoacoustics, electronics and the use of high-end studio equipment and techniques which will result in predictable, repeatable, defeatable and scalable phenomena.
When it comes to electronic circuit and design trust me you can't even begin to imaging who you are challenging as I design complex electronics circuits for NASA and HP among others. You have no idea what you are talking about with this statement:
When you find an IC that passes a signal without any attendant exaggeration or loss in a 20-20 khz band, please let us all know. i think there's some several hundred high-end audio electronic manufacturers who would be interested in your finding.
For one, have you ever heard of an instrumentation Op-amp?
As far as your question:
You have to have an open mind and a good system to hear these things. which are you lacking?
Quiet frankly neither. I have invited you countless number of times to come and judge my system and my approach for yourself and you refuse it. Let's try it again. Come over this Saturday and I will return the gesture by going to your house on Sunday to listen to what you bring to the table! Fair enough? |
Ryan,
Where did I mention a graphic equalizer? I have never own a graphic EQ but that is exactly what a Cello Palette is; try to tell Tom Jung of DMP, Shawn Murphy of Hollywood/movie scoring fame, Mrs. Wilma Kozart of Mercury Living Presence fame that their $25K Cello Audio Palettes are a piece of junk! It is used in many of the recordings that you use to evaluate system as a "reviewer".
I hate to say it but I think that you have clearly over-stepped your area of expertise and are quickly getting yourself in trouble when you try to discuss electronic circuit design and mastering studio gear with me. Don't say I didn't warn you as I'm known to be ruthless. |
Norm,
Look it up at Texas A&M University, College Station as I earned a degree in physics and a separate degree in Electrical Engineering there. I know that you are retired now but perhaps you still know someone there who has access to the records at the register's office.
I know about John Tucker the ex-NASA engineer.
By the way Norm, let me shake your memory a little bit. You actually listen and favorable commented on my Seamless Interface Electro-Acoustiques Big Dog TVC (Transformer Volume Control) about five years ago. We had a brief chat on how we both thought highly of the Victor Goldstein's Fanfare Fi Millennium Siltech/Plinius preamplifier and how we both thought that the Tecnik Avant Garde (TAG) Model One was the best solid state preamplifier we both had heard. Look at the pictures under my system here on Audiogon and you'll see that I still have mine and it has been upgraded to Ultimate level.
Does that jar your memory?
My work for NASA can be documented and pictures of my diplomas for degrees in Physics and a separate one for Electrical Engineering can be furnished if you wish. I'm neither ignorant nor do I have anything to hide. |
Ryan,
Here is just a few of the things which are different about my current system than the one that you heard four years ago:
1. To begin with the Transport has been changed to a Forsell Air Reference Mk.IV air-bearing transport.
2. The whole digital chain is moved to 2x DSD = 1bit at 5.6MHz before it gets converted to analog via the best DSD/DXD converter in the world.
3. The biggest change in my system has been the incorporation of high-end studio gear, both in the digital and the analog chains, which let me have complete control of all parameters associated with audiophile benchmarks (soundstage width, depth and height control, tonal balance spectral content, upward compression of low level details and on and on and......)
4. In the winter months I use my NRG Control A-401M monoblocks these massive amps are 400 Watts of pure class A power and have the control and authority to make your knees buckle.
There are way too many changes to list here and frankly is kind of dump to list the specific as you have to take the system and its sound as a whole.
By the way, my analog sources have changed to reference Transrotor and Micro-Seiki turntables. The phonostages have changed to Audion Premier Quattro custom three-chassis design and a rare six-tube David Manley MC Balance design for Simon Yorke. All these analog sources get converted to 2X DSD (1bit/5.6Mhz).
The whole system takes into account room correction and acoustic treatment has been added to the room since you last were here.
Like I said I could go on and on. The list of new equipment is endless as well as I have tried a great number of amplifiers, preamps, sources and speakers in my reference system.
By the way, as far as being an authority on audio circuits, audio circuits are relatively SIMPLE compare to the state-machines that I have been designing in ALTERA FPGA's lately so I can assure you that there is nothing; I repeat NOTHING that you can teach me in the way of audio circuit design and topologies. While Audio circuit design is not my business, I can assure you that I'm more than capable, as I have shown whenever I have modified and ventured into audio circuit designs and modifications. Like I said, you're up against a bull and I would watch your steps when you challenge my knowledge of audio and electronics in general.
How about me coming over and listening to your system first? Is that fair enough? I want to hear what you bring to the table as a reviewer and to see what your reference is.
By the way, one of the new speakers in my stable is the Wilson Audio WITT Series II do you know why Wilson Audio discontinued them? Because they couldn't sell the WATT/PUPPY 6 once prospective buyers listen to how the WITT Series II gave them the slam and dynamics but also the "warmth" that the cold, analytical and sterile Watt/Puppy 6 did not. A VERY smart business move on Wilsons part if you asked me but it's a shame as the WITT Series TWO were the starts of their line-up at the time. Perhaps you may want to even compare my WITTS Series II to your Watt/Puppy 6 to validate this yourself; there you go I just gave you another reason to make the 25 minute drive. |
Ralph,
Are you familiar with the many tube saturation devices in the Pro Audio world? These devices are design with just this purpose in mind. Beyond changing the tube saturation/distortion characteristics there are devices in the Studio world that go far beyond what is possible in the audiophile world.
It was my understanding that on top of being an audio designer you are also a musician so you should be familiar with devices like SPLs Machine Head which let you change tube saturation and distortion characteristics in the digital domain. These are convolution devices but many devices are analog and work of the tubes originals saturation/distortion characteristics.
By the way, my experience and the experience of others that have opened up Cello equipment concurs with yours; they were over-priced boutique pieces which did not reflect their asking price. What I was simply trying to do was to show Ryan that although I do not make use of graphic equalizers many mastering luminaries do use them.
The top equalizers that I would recommend are: SPL PQ Mastering edition, Avalon AD-2077 and GML GM-9500 try to tell me that any of those mastering "parametric" equalizers are junk. I personally prefer psychoacoustic equalizers which is a different branch of sound processors.
Your approach of taking the tube variable out of the equation is the correct approach as your design should try to minimize the effects of different "vintage" tubes as much as it is possible. |
Herman, Lets get together and listen to each other's systems and let's take it from there! Should we? Where are you located? Maybe I can pit stop at your place on one of my frequent trips to Shanghai, China. |
Ralph,
There is a "High-End" faction of the pro-audio world there as well; which does use tubes and the highest quality part selections. This faction of products are quiet expensive as you can imagine.
What I meant by studio gear going further than high-end gear is NOT in parts/build quality but in function.
The top mastering houses like Sterling Sound in NYC, Bob Katz's Studio and Ludwig's Gateway Mastering Studios among others do not only make use of these high-end studio gear but high-end audiophile gear as well. If you look at the pictures of my room and the gear in it on my system's page here on Audiogon you'll see that I have also have been able to merge the two factions together with great success.
The realm that I have been exploiting lately includes ambient space recreation and panorama control; my system now incorporates these capabilities along with making use of other mastering techniques. |
Norm,
The original thread was started on 3-14-06, if Aspera has not purchased or at least tried a number of the recommended candidates by now then he's obviously not using his system enough.
To answer the original question:
Passive: Any high quality TVC (Transformer Volume Control). Since the original post asked ever = the ultimate expression of this design the Seamless Interface Electro-Acoustique's Big-Dog (My own design and NO LONGER AVAILABLE....not even for a cold $25K!)
Solid-State: Technik Avant Garde Model One Ultimate version (If you can find one)
Tube: Tempo Electric 1.1 with Dual outboard power supplies or any Authur Loesch design. My favorite is the one based on the awesome 6C45Pi high gain super-tube.
This thread is no longer high-jacked but has been set free to fly again! |
Professor Norm,
No hard feelings. I'm sorry that I came on so strong but on this forum if you do not come strong then you get run over by people just looking to deliver a beating.
As I mentioned in my previous post, before you started advocating magic pebbles and teleportation, I held your opinion at the highest level. But I have to be honest with you; the placebo affect of those tweaks is hard for me to swallow as a person of science.
I think that I know what kind of signal processing is used on your H-CAT and if I'm correct then I can see why you have come to love it. I'm using a more complex implementation of the same concept in my reference system and enjoy what it does for the presentation.
If you come down to Houston and have some free time let me know, I would like to host you for an evening of listening and audio chat. |
