No I have not, but the best designs are never cheap though. The best quality components cost money. A great design when coupled with the very best passive components could be glorious. I have heard a few that were just that. Incredible.
I have not heard the Blowtorch, but that does not mean that it is not a pinnacle type product either. I prefer the sound of tube circuits, but many people prefer SS. There is room for all in my world
And probably you never will. That's the funniest part about the Blowtorch: almost nobody has heard one, but almost everybody has an opinion about
And probably you never will. That's the funniest part about the Blowtorch: almost nobody has heard one, but almost everybody has an opinion about
That includes yourself – having so many opinions …
Hi Steve,
Anyway, excellent examples of things we (or at least I) take for granted.
Hi syn08,
The one thing we must accept is that in the audio business, it's as much about the sound quality as the appearance and any other marketing advantages. Once you pass a certain level in price, pure performance may actually become irrelevant to some extent.
I am not commenting on the Blowtorch here, just general observations made over many years in the audio industry. The fact that John is using something that scores technically as well as aesthetically is a bonus. If it were an aluminum outer case over a damped steel interior of the proper dimensions, customers would be buying the solid aluminum unit simply over the perception of quality if nothing else.
Hi Curly,
What syn08 is saying has merit, just as you reflect what the average customer may think. Two viewpoints from opposite corners of the universe. What construction methods actually work better, or deliver higher actual technical value is normally non-existent in both very low end, and very high end products. Again, not talking about the Blowtorch specifically. I can't comment on the Blowtorch as I have never even seen one before. But I can comment from many years in audio service and earlier years as a salesman selling higher end products.
I think that the point being made is that the best audio devices are not always the most expensive. In fact, paying extremely high dollars almost guarantees a poorly designed piece of equipment! By the same token, you have to spend beyond some minimal number of dollars in order to get your money's worth. At either extreme, service is usually a nightmare as well.
For what it's worth, Chris
That's an even better example. The worst part is that I know this stuff and actually had done work on scales in the past! Duh.
Anyway, excellent examples of things we (or at least I) take for granted.
Hi syn08,
I'll bet this has been done already, complete with review on the silvery sound!
The one thing we must accept is that in the audio business, it's as much about the sound quality as the appearance and any other marketing advantages. Once you pass a certain level in price, pure performance may actually become irrelevant to some extent.
I am not commenting on the Blowtorch here, just general observations made over many years in the audio industry. The fact that John is using something that scores technically as well as aesthetically is a bonus. If it were an aluminum outer case over a damped steel interior of the proper dimensions, customers would be buying the solid aluminum unit simply over the perception of quality if nothing else.
Hi Curly,
What syn08 is saying has merit, just as you reflect what the average customer may think. Two viewpoints from opposite corners of the universe. What construction methods actually work better, or deliver higher actual technical value is normally non-existent in both very low end, and very high end products. Again, not talking about the Blowtorch specifically. I can't comment on the Blowtorch as I have never even seen one before. But I can comment from many years in audio service and earlier years as a salesman selling higher end products.
I think that the point being made is that the best audio devices are not always the most expensive. In fact, paying extremely high dollars almost guarantees a poorly designed piece of equipment! By the same token, you have to spend beyond some minimal number of dollars in order to get your money's worth. At either extreme, service is usually a nightmare as well.
For what it's worth, Chris
This may be true for some people, definitely not for all. There are people out there who are only concerned in sound quality (me included). Price of quality (combined with price of marketing) is the painful part of the deal.
Do you have concrete examples, or is it only musing, some thoughts flying around without any basis in reality?
Hi Joshua,
If you do get someone's attention, you can usually make a case for the better equipment. That's as long as it doesn't cost that much more.
I will say that I can not mention some examples I would otherwise love to single out, but there are some.
Try early Bryston, Proximity amplifiers, Audio Alchemy, Counterpoint ... hmmm, pro maybe? Stewart. There are many, many more. I should point out that Sony's ES line can be fun (and Sony hides problems and will even release mis-information to cover things up). There are some higher end CD players that are actually less than $500 units in a fancy case - with features removed!! Car audio is rife with expensive junk as well.
Any good audio service person can easily point out many complete rip-offs. This is not difficult to see once the covers are off if you understand what makes a good electrical design and good construction.
I could name many more I guess, and I'm sure most of us could do the same. But the higher the price tag is, the more terrible units there seems to be per unit sold.
Even Revox had some real duds in the last years. The 251 and 242 are both good examples of this (heat, excessive voltage across adjacent traces, traces far too thin). The early CD players had a few real gems of design practice as well. Minor ones that can take out the laser diode, good thing they were not expensive problems (satire). Studer had issues with the reel motor drive on some 2" 24 trk machines also. Those cost .... like more than a car. Same problems with early CD players (no surprise there).
I also know of many well regarded (for sound quality) audio devices. The original NAIT for one. NAD and many more that I'd have to research to remember their names. One has regulated power supplies, runs under biased and is quasi complementary. No shortage of units placed higher in audio circles that turn out to be simply poor designs.
Many of the designers for problematic equipment really knew better, or should have. Other designers really just ignored good design practices and helpful advice. As usual, the customers paid the price for this.
Now, have I said anything you disagree with Joshua? If so, please explain and let us know how closely you were able to inspect the design in question.
-Chris
True, but the bulk of the market is represented by my comment. I spent years selling better audio gear to people. Many times it came down to how it looked or what the ad copy was saying (true or false).
If you do get someone's attention, you can usually make a case for the better equipment. That's as long as it doesn't cost that much more.
That includes me as well, and probably most other people here. But the very fact you are posting here pre-qualifies the audience to a great extent.
Well, I really do. Although I must say that I don't care for the tone or implicated idea of your post. Would you care to explain your comments?
I will say that I can not mention some examples I would otherwise love to single out, but there are some.
Try early Bryston, Proximity amplifiers, Audio Alchemy, Counterpoint ... hmmm, pro maybe? Stewart. There are many, many more. I should point out that Sony's ES line can be fun (and Sony hides problems and will even release mis-information to cover things up). There are some higher end CD players that are actually less than $500 units in a fancy case - with features removed!! Car audio is rife with expensive junk as well.
Any good audio service person can easily point out many complete rip-offs. This is not difficult to see once the covers are off if you understand what makes a good electrical design and good construction.
I could name many more I guess, and I'm sure most of us could do the same. But the higher the price tag is, the more terrible units there seems to be per unit sold.
Even Revox had some real duds in the last years. The 251 and 242 are both good examples of this (heat, excessive voltage across adjacent traces, traces far too thin). The early CD players had a few real gems of design practice as well. Minor ones that can take out the laser diode, good thing they were not expensive problems (satire). Studer had issues with the reel motor drive on some 2" 24 trk machines also. Those cost .... like more than a car. Same problems with early CD players (no surprise there).
I also know of many well regarded (for sound quality) audio devices. The original NAIT for one. NAD and many more that I'd have to research to remember their names. One has regulated power supplies, runs under biased and is quasi complementary. No shortage of units placed higher in audio circles that turn out to be simply poor designs.
Many of the designers for problematic equipment really knew better, or should have. Other designers really just ignored good design practices and helpful advice. As usual, the customers paid the price for this.
Now, have I said anything you disagree with Joshua? If so, please explain and let us know how closely you were able to inspect the design in question.
-Chris
Hi John,
No one is here to win arguments. I'm only concerned that Joshua may have a valid concern. Besides, I am clearly posting as a member who has both experience and opinions to share, just like most other members do.
After all, Joshua has years of studio experience and has been able to work with advanced sound equipment. It would be nice to have his view on these matters.
John,
Do you have much experience with North American J-Fet types? I've been looking into sourcing transistors from local (sort of) suppliers. Have you looked at the J202? Fairchild lists it while On Semi looks like they are getting out of the signal J-Fet business all together.
If you have other good suggestions for North American part numbers, please mention them. TO-92 case is preferred for me right now.
-Chris
No one is here to win arguments. I'm only concerned that Joshua may have a valid concern. Besides, I am clearly posting as a member who has both experience and opinions to share, just like most other members do.
After all, Joshua has years of studio experience and has been able to work with advanced sound equipment. It would be nice to have his view on these matters.
John,
Do you have much experience with North American J-Fet types? I've been looking into sourcing transistors from local (sort of) suppliers. Have you looked at the J202? Fairchild lists it while On Semi looks like they are getting out of the signal J-Fet business all together.
If you have other good suggestions for North American part numbers, please mention them. TO-92 case is preferred for me right now.
-Chris
Yes indeed. Don't forget that that $ 3000 is the manufacturing cost for that case. Economics being what it is, the fraction of that case cost in the $ 40,000 end price is probably close to $ 15.000. For the case. You guys still there?
jd
Jan, the price was about $10,000, initially. It was increased up to $15,000 directly from us, over the years, but few people paid this price. We then quit making them, when the price of the cases and control parts increased significantly, in fact literally doubled over the life of the product. The RETAIL PRICE in Japan was almost 5 million yen. You can compute what that amount is in your own currency. However, we had to sell the complete product, with warranty, at $10,000 to the Japanese importer, as they bought more than 5, and they made the deal with us, years before the price increases.
The next step for a no compromise amp would be to build the case out of solid silver. This will certainly help and the amp will have a open, silverish sound
This would address one of the really burning issues in high end audio- lasting value. Most of this stuff seems to become e-waste after a few years, once it falls out of fashion. But the silver would have lasting value (and reflect the underlying jewelery aspects of most audio packaging). Given some of the really hard to comprehend prices for audio products, silver isn't out of line at all. Perhaps bolted together from ingots with the assay marks showing so there is no question of its value.
And probably you never will. That's the funniest part about the Blowtorch: almost nobody has heard one, but almost everybody has an opinion about
Why would it matter if you or I never heard it. It was a viable product for those that wanted it. In comparison what have you designed that people were willing to pay that kind of money for lately? Is there a degree of envy that permeates your thought process?
John has made a name for himself in audio and will be remembered in history. What is your collective contribution to history, let alone audio?
John is continually attacked, but no one that I see attacking him has demonstrated the ability to bring a product to market, let alone have the "classic" status that he has provided to the manufacturers that have sold his designs or the long term degree of satisfaction that their owners enjoy. I see the attempts to tear apart his designs, but not one of you have every subjected yourselves to the demands of designing a product that has to be manufactured and presented to the masses. His designs have stood the test of time and still have instant name recognition and value. Something about that says a lot to me about his skills and his understanding about what makes audio equipment sound its best.
If you all want to be "know it all's" then prove your mettle and set the audio world on its ear. Design something that audiophiles will die to own, die to possess and then are willing to pay for with hard cash. It seems easy from on high, but believe me, sound is all that matters when you ascend into these lofty limits. People separate the chafe rather quickly at these lofty levels and those that remain offer something special or they are quickly forgotten.
I know this is a DIY forum and so this is another reason that the public dismantling of an icon is also disturbing. John's contributions are obvious. Why not embrace his knowledge and move on from that if you possess the knowledge, but please do not attempt to ridicule a person that has given so much to a hobby that I love and so many others.
Well, OK, that changes things. Frankly, at $ 10k, with the case alone costing 3k, I don't see how you can make a decent buck/yen, at low volume.
jd
Curly,
If you read the posts carefully, you will note that John's accomplishments are regularly recognized. I remember syn08 going out of his way some time ago to state precisely this. People are indeed paying handsomely for the privelege to own a JC design. The reasons for that are probably multivarious, but the fact is they do. That indeed is an accomplishment and something John can be justifiedly proud off. And I haven't read anything to detract from that.
OTOH, in an engineering discussion, people often disagree with John on engineering grounds, and they also say why they don't agree or why they feel John's (or anybody else's, for that matter) engineering choices are wrong, or less optimal. And that is the gist of these discussions. This thread doesn't exist to discuss why people buy JC products. It is to discuss circuits, component choices and other engineering issues. And here disagreement reigns, apparently. As it should; in the interest of learning and making better choices in the future. I believe this is also John's stated purpose for being here: to help people make better choices and engineering decisions. It just turns out, apparently, that he may also learn a thing or two in the process. A win-win situation, I would say.
jd
I've got to look that up...
Edit: I did. Wikipedia doesn't directly describe it but refers to the Socratic Method:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method .
Seems that is indeed what happens a lot here. OK, I'll try even harder to avoid ad hominem attacks....
jd
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.