Bill Johnson (Audio Research) was a good engineer who used and recommended Shunyata cords for his electronics. Roger Modjeski (Music Reference) is also a good engineer, and is a power cord skeptic. Roger's electronics are very transparent, and is now making an electrostatic loudspeaker, known for their transparency. I don't know the reason for their honest difference of opinion. |
No sooner had I posted the directly above, than I realized my comments about Bill Johnson and ARC might well bring out the knee-jerk ARC defenders. I in no way meant to denigrade Bill's design talents (he is single-handedly responsible for high end electronics as we know them, imo), or to imply Roger (or Van Alstine, or anyone else) is the "better" engineer. What I was attempting to do was draw a distinction between the traditional EE designer and the designer at a high end audiophile company, and the considerations the latter has to take into account in his designs. I do think it possible Bill (and Rich Larsen, as well as designers at other audiophile companies) incorporated some audiophile-credibility features in ARC products he knew provided no sonic advantage, for merely marketing reasons. That's mere conjecture on my part, of course! |
oregonpapa---Bill Johnson, though a "progressive" engineer (listening tests playing a large role in the development and evaluation of a new design/product), was also pretty traditional/conservative, being more of an EE type than a lot of high end designers (some of whom are not formally educated engineers, but advanced audiophiles---formerly lawyers, for instance). I had not ruled out ARC's use of Shunyata power cords at CES and consumer shows (as well as the chassis damping employed in the SE version of some of the LS pre-amps) as a cynical move to keep audiophile credibility with, for instance, the reviewers and readers of The Absolute Sound and Positive Feedback, who seem particularly influenced by that kind of thing in their perception of a company and the sound of it's products. Roger Modjeski, in contrast, though much younger than Bill, is much more of an academic and old school degreed EE designer, who first evaluates a design with a close inspection of it's schematic, then extensive bench tests to expose any weakness or problem behavior in a circuit, listening to it only after it has passed those hurdles. Roger couldn't care less about reviewers (he has stated making amplifiers is of much less interest to him than is designing them, perhaps why Music Reference has such a low profile) or audiophile credibility-insecure consumers, and is willing to sacrifice sales and ac to remain intellectually honest. I know Frank Van Alstine feels the same. |
Mark Levinson, the man, thought enough of the Quad to use a pair mounted very high in stands, augmented with a 24" Hartley woofer and Decca ribbon tweeter, to create his HQD loudspeaker in the 70's. He could have used any speaker in it's place, but chose the Quad, not for no reason. |
Actually knghifi, Roger in more than skeptical of boutique fuses, he warns against their use in power amps. He tested some of the Hi-Fi Tuning ones, and discussed their design with the U.S. distributor. Roger discovered that, regardless of whether or not they "sound better" than garden variety fuses, they in some circumstances do not even do what a fuse is supposed to do. In his report, he explains exactly what he found wrong with them. You can read the report on the Music Reference Audiocircle Forum, where "Tuning Fuses" is a sticky topic. |
Right you are knghifi. Roger offers wire (either speaker or inter-connect, I don't remember which), so that he must "believe" in. |
Thanks Chris. I really gotta learn how to insert a link into a post! I found Roger's warning about using the Tuning Fuses on power tubes and in the amp the tubes are in very, very important. Whether a fuse sounds different/better is a question separate from whether or not it actually works as a fuse. I don't consider Roger's findings on a fuse's ability at acting as a fuse is supposed to at any way unaudiophilic. An amplifier damaged by a fuse incapable of performing it's given task will "sound" very much worse than the same amplifier with a stock fuse ;-). |
For documentation of the Tuning Fuses causing harm to a power amp, click on the link that ct0517 provided above. In the thread Roger Modjeski not only describes the failings of the fuses, but explains the why. |
And thanks to ct0517 for providing the link! Taters, you have proven you are sincerely interested in hearing the truth about the Tuning Fuses, as unpopular as that truth may be here on Audiogon. And intellectually honest enough to actually consider what Roger Modjeski, apparently a polarizing figure here, has to say about them. Roger took the trouble to investigate the fuses and share what he discovered, and all we have to do is read what that discovery was. I really don't know what to say to anyone who claims to care about the subject but either can't be bothered to read the thread, or worse, refuses to, for whatever reason. I realize Roger's skepticism (at least!) of many audiophile notions precludes him from being an audiophile "darling", but he is seriously knowledgeable about tubes, circuits, and amplifier design. He has no axe to grind on the subject of fuses---he doesn't make and sell them. But he knows a design problem when he sees it, and he sees one in the Tuning Fuse. Why would anyone take a defensive position about that without even bothering to read what the problem Roger found was? I don't get it. |
There may be one---I'm sure Roger would prefer the owner of the Music Reference RM-9 that sent the amp in for repair (a result of the eight $49 Hi-Fi Tuning fuses the owner had installed on the output power tubes in the amp not performing as they should but don't---the very reason for Roger's warning about them) had spent spend the $400 ($400---on fuses?!) on more MR product rather than the fuses! Then there was the approximately $400 in replacement tubes and $350 to repair the amp, all because the Hi-Fi Tuning Fuses failed to act in the manner they are supposed to---to blow when they need to, the very reason for fuses. If you want a power amp without fused tubes, buy an Audio Research! The design and construction of the Hi-Fi Tuning fuse prevents it from performing it's intended function when put in the signal path of an output power tube. And what's worse, the manufacturer does not appear to be aware of what performance characteristics a fuse must possess to make it appropriate for that application! That's all Roger's warning was about---very simple. If that's not of interest or significance to you, you're free to ignore the warning. But to impugn Roger Modjeski's intentions? |
I too would wonder why Roger elicits such animosity from some audiophiles, Chris, but your quotes from the RM-10 manual reminded me! He does not bow down at the altar of high end boutique parts. I believe it is as simple as that. In an interview, Tim de Paravicini of EAR-Yoshino was asked whether or not he was a "tweak", and he responded vigorously that he most certainly was not, he was too much of a professional engineer to be so. Roger and Tim seem to be able to make excellent sounding electronics with garden-variety parts, but designers/manufactures who use boutique parts do so too. But you're right Chris, Roger takes reliability very seriously. He started his career fixing broken electronics, and learned all the wrong ways to design and build an amp! |
