I would like to point something out, before: 'All H--- breaks loose' that these comments are the most accurate and honest that I can make on the subject of power cords.
I simply accept what my ears and those of my colleagues hear, IN DIRECT COMPARISON with other products. That is how I can make decisions as how to make successful audio products, and NOT overlook something that 'doesn't make any sense'.
This is what I have been 'preaching' here over the last 6 years or so. NOT circuit design exclusively, but the stuff that goes BEYOND the basic design, yet can make all the difference.
I don't do marketing, myself. Never have, but I do know that some manufacturers have emphasized my name on a product to increase sales. It can give me a 'swelled head' if I let it, but I don't necessarily believe the 'puffery' that includes me.
Decades ago, Mark Levinson and I shared a vision. Mark fell by the wayside, because he came to believe his own 'hype' about his contribution to the products, and even I could not get him to improve an obvious oversight, if Mark, himself had created it. It created a big 'falling out' that has never been repaired between Mark and myself. And I, somewhat later, started Vendetta Research to keep with the original vision.
I simply accept what my ears and those of my colleagues hear, IN DIRECT COMPARISON with other products. That is how I can make decisions as how to make successful audio products, and NOT overlook something that 'doesn't make any sense'.
This is what I have been 'preaching' here over the last 6 years or so. NOT circuit design exclusively, but the stuff that goes BEYOND the basic design, yet can make all the difference.
I don't do marketing, myself. Never have, but I do know that some manufacturers have emphasized my name on a product to increase sales. It can give me a 'swelled head' if I let it, but I don't necessarily believe the 'puffery' that includes me.
Decades ago, Mark Levinson and I shared a vision. Mark fell by the wayside, because he came to believe his own 'hype' about his contribution to the products, and even I could not get him to improve an obvious oversight, if Mark, himself had created it. It created a big 'falling out' that has never been repaired between Mark and myself. And I, somewhat later, started Vendetta Research to keep with the original vision.
The closest I came to your place Christophe when I passed through Albi on the way to Millau to see the viaduct, but I had to interrupt my journey to experience that monstrous cathedral in Albi. The distant view of the cathedral took me off the road.
IMO, Mr. JC teaches all audio amateurs or wannabe pros a priceless lesson: in audio, competent engineering doesn't sell, stories about the magic sound do. And the higher the price tag, the more the above is true.
There are a few mars rover designers around that stubbornly believe there's anything new to be developed in the audio electronics. They are as wrong as the illusion of a power cord sound. Acoustics, yes, there's something to really dig into, and put your money in...
My opinion on Mr. JC stances is similar to my opinion on many sports teams or bands: that is to say, that he isn't nearly as stupid and annoying as his close disciples.
Off my soapbox
And yet... that famously head-in-the-audiophile-clouds anti-science jneutron has shown repeatedly in this very thread, and quite clearly, how and why power cords can affect the audio signal. No magic involved, only ground loops. But when John Curl says that an effect might exist, we start the kindlin'. Logical.
Thanks,
Chris
Thanks,
Chris
My question would rather be: How can anybody can justify such a surrealistic selling price.
Can-you explain-us how to make such a great power cord ?
You mean, it brings power to the evil *electrochemical* condensers ?
Last edited:
The problem is that many critics here have no real design experience with high end audio and no experience with high end audio products. It is very easy to criticize then based on simple maths and simple technical R/L/C like reasoning. Real experience is not transferable so these discussions are in 99% totally useless. Some people seem to have plenty of time to waste it on Internet. Internet is perfect, but it mostly contains rubbish.
You are right, i'm sure that building yourself from scratch a Ford T will cost you more than the last big Mercedes. Especially if you use 500$/m cords to power the headlights.
Last edited:
JC, what Levinson gear were you involved with?
This info is important to me for closure on some 'features' I noticed on their stuff in the 70's and 80's.
As I said earlier, I have ABSOLUTELY no problem with Unobtainium hand carved by Virgins in $$$ gear where the price tag is appropriate PROVIDED it sounds AT LEAST AS GOOD AS CHEAPO stuff.
But this discussion is still appropriate if Blowtorch fails the important Hirata test, and is worse than cheapo 4558 stuff on Quan & Listening Tests.
Until we find out the reason(s) for this poor performance, we need to know what is used in Blowtorch, components, topology, power cords etc so we can avoid similar problems.
Much better to get it from the horse's mouth. Besides, JC is always eager to tell us of his achievements at ML.
ML history Thanks for this Miklos. The ML2 is indeed the amp I was looking for.
JC, is this the product where
I note it has an evil output inductor.John Curl said:
That last burst of energy here seems to have run out of steam, the faders are dropping back steadily ...
The answer to everything,
, is very simple: subjectively good sound requires low levels of perceived distortion, not microscopic accuracy of frequency and phase response; the key word here is "perceived", and there are two ways of going about this: the objectivists say electronics are solved, so let it rip -- uh oh, doesn't sound too good, must be a bad recording or poor acoustics, so that that's the way to solve everything, fix up either or both of those aspects; another, much smaller group, believes in ensuring the signal is as clean as possible before it hits the speaker drivers, which requires delving into the more esoteric areas (where have I heard that before ... ) of the overall to make it better -- which quite irreligious, according to some.Personally, I follow the 2nd path: a lot more end satisfaction and a bigger range of software can do the job; the 1st is incredibly twitchy, the slightest abberation or variation in circumstances, and all the good work up to that point can be undone ...
,,Frank
Ahhh, ahh, ahh, you've discovered my big secret, Christophe!! -- what'sa poor boy to do ...
Frank
Richard, we appriciate your enthusiasm but maybe you should lighten up your insistance on these various tests. We have learned by experience that they will not happen. This line of inquisition is tired.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.