In retrospect, the vile appearance of the Stereo 70 was a joke, like hot-rodders who take nasty-looking old cars and go crazy on the engine and suspension. In the USA, they're called "sleepers". It's a kind of techno-joke for geeks ... don't be fooled by looks.
The reason our group-of-three set aside the advanced MOSFET amplifier was that we had never heard any transistor amp, from any vendor, match the sound of the triode-converted Stereo 70. We also knew the Dyna was at the bottom of the heap in terms of tube amps; there were much better designs even back in the Golden Age of the Fifties, like the Leak, Quad II, and Mullard.
The reason our group-of-three set aside the advanced MOSFET amplifier was that we had never heard any transistor amp, from any vendor, match the sound of the triode-converted Stereo 70. We also knew the Dyna was at the bottom of the heap in terms of tube amps; there were much better designs even back in the Golden Age of the Fifties, like the Leak, Quad II, and Mullard.
One of the great dilemmas of audio - the closer a system gets to being technically correct, often the worst it subjectively sounds. So, is it doing something wrong? Not really, often it's just because the envelope's being pushed even harder, you just can hear all the tiny defects ever so clearly, they are not nicely smeared over as is often the case.
I've been down this road so many times, over so many years - the system becomes almost impossible to listen to at times, but I just have to push through the 'pain barrier' - on the other side is the good stuff, the reason I decided to 'go to the gym' in the first place: rich, glorious sound ... if I pull back now, take the easy way out, of 'nicefying' something in the setup, then I will always be aware that I chickened out - didn't take that next, essential step to fully clean up the system ...
I've been down this road so many times, over so many years - the system becomes almost impossible to listen to at times, but I just have to push through the 'pain barrier' - on the other side is the good stuff, the reason I decided to 'go to the gym' in the first place: rich, glorious sound ... if I pull back now, take the easy way out, of 'nicefying' something in the setup, then I will always be aware that I chickened out - didn't take that next, essential step to fully clean up the system ...
I'm wary when a number of recordings start to sound bad (in either LP or CD format).
Yes, as Peter Walker said, the wider you open the window, the more dirt blows in. (PW said this when the UK was burning a lot of coal; it was an everyday experience for a lot of Brits.)
But ... there are a lot of problems in playback systems that add very unpleasant artifacts to below-standard recordings. In CD playback, if the analog stages slew (and nearly all do), then bright CD's will sound outright harsh and unlistenable. Same story for LP playback; mistracking and crud on the record surface sound much worse if there's any slewing in the phono preamp.
HF peaking, and more subtle resonances in the decay interval (as seen on waterfall CSD displays), make "bad" recordings sound unlistenable. Take care of the HF problems, and the "bad" recordings can be listened to and genuinely enjoyed. It's the difference between enjoying all of your music collection or just parts of it. Some audiophile systems, although "transparent" in the usual sense, only sound enjoyable on a handful of audiophile recordings. I've heard plenty of systems like this.
Yes, as Peter Walker said, the wider you open the window, the more dirt blows in. (PW said this when the UK was burning a lot of coal; it was an everyday experience for a lot of Brits.)
But ... there are a lot of problems in playback systems that add very unpleasant artifacts to below-standard recordings. In CD playback, if the analog stages slew (and nearly all do), then bright CD's will sound outright harsh and unlistenable. Same story for LP playback; mistracking and crud on the record surface sound much worse if there's any slewing in the phono preamp.
HF peaking, and more subtle resonances in the decay interval (as seen on waterfall CSD displays), make "bad" recordings sound unlistenable. Take care of the HF problems, and the "bad" recordings can be listened to and genuinely enjoyed. It's the difference between enjoying all of your music collection or just parts of it. Some audiophile systems, although "transparent" in the usual sense, only sound enjoyable on a handful of audiophile recordings. I've heard plenty of systems like this.
Last edited:
Yes, it's overall system health that counts, the full chain matters - neglect one link, and the listening suffers ... and pristine HF is key, as you say. An excellent guideline is when one starts to play with a completely different system - topology, configuration, power supply implementation, way off in another direction from what one had before - and you bring it up to better SQ without tampering with any of the basics of the setup ... and steadily, one by one, the 'reference' recordings fall into line, start sounding exactly as you know their innate nature to be ...
Last edited:
I think this thread is compelling reading, Lynn. Keep at it. 
I can't help noticing the lovely conversion of unbalanced input to balanced or at least symettrical output in Eli Duttman's schematic with your likeable quoted Mullard Valve Circuit Thread.
That has elegance. I'm not surprised it works well.
People are talking about musicality here. I am slightly gobsmacked with a bit of work I did on these Sony E44 speakers which I found in a thrift shop.
These cloth surround speakers reminded me of Tannoy, which I liked, so I had a go at it. A mere single 3.3uF capacitor on the treble was the filter. Nothing else. I gave it a KEF type 2nd order LF/3rd order HF filter and a Morel CAT 298 soft dome tweeter. Quite decent HiFi sound, but no cigar.
I then reinstalled the Sony Mylar cone type tweeter. It's a KNOCKOUT! Sounds so good you forget it's a recording of Ella and Louis. OK, the cabinet and construction is a bit poor and rattles a bit sometimes, but that's not the point.
Is Robin Marshall right?
I can't help noticing the lovely conversion of unbalanced input to balanced or at least symettrical output in Eli Duttman's schematic with your likeable quoted Mullard Valve Circuit Thread.
That has elegance. I'm not surprised it works well.
People are talking about musicality here. I am slightly gobsmacked with a bit of work I did on these Sony E44 speakers which I found in a thrift shop.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
These cloth surround speakers reminded me of Tannoy, which I liked, so I had a go at it. A mere single 3.3uF capacitor on the treble was the filter. Nothing else. I gave it a KEF type 2nd order LF/3rd order HF filter and a Morel CAT 298 soft dome tweeter. Quite decent HiFi sound, but no cigar.
I then reinstalled the Sony Mylar cone type tweeter. It's a KNOCKOUT! Sounds so good you forget it's a recording of Ella and Louis. OK, the cabinet and construction is a bit poor and rattles a bit sometimes, but that's not the point.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Is Robin Marshall right?
Last edited:
I can tell you that the cost differential between an aluminum or silk or polymer dome is a world of difference between those and Be. A raw Be diaphragm for a 1" dome is in the range of $35.00 for a good guy price and you can multiply the surface area and you will see why a Be diaphragm for a compression driver cost is so high. The cost for just the diaphragm for a beryllium dome tweeter is often much higher than the cost of a completed soft dome or aluminum. This would be even higher for a vapor deposited material rather than the foil type material from Brush Wellman.
On the comments I see often about magnet materials those are very deceptive also. There are many grades of magnets in all types of materials. The Neo magnets have a very wide range of coercive force and also heat ratings. Most typical audio devices are using very low grade Neo on the order of 35MgOe while there are grades that have much higher values and costs that go up with them. I have been using 52MgOe material for a few years now and it does come at a price premium.
On the comments I see often about magnet materials those are very deceptive also. There are many grades of magnets in all types of materials. The Neo magnets have a very wide range of coercive force and also heat ratings. Most typical audio devices are using very low grade Neo on the order of 35MgOe while there are grades that have much higher values and costs that go up with them. I have been using 52MgOe material for a few years now and it does come at a price premium.
Then what about field coils vs neo? Is not the point of field coil is to increase the strength of the magnetic field? Well, premium neo must be pretty strong already.
I have also read that the is a difference in sound between "Tungar" tube field coil power supplies and other types of field coil supplies. How can this affect the sound?? Seem almost magical.
I have also read that the is a difference in sound between "Tungar" tube field coil power supplies and other types of field coil supplies. How can this affect the sound?? Seem almost magical.
Last edited:
Usually "yes". When "technical correctness" as determined by a few figures-of-merit, is being obsessively, dogmatically pursued.
At the expense of everything else.
It's been that way for at least fifty years, if Crowhurst is to be believed.
Rewind,
That is a question I often ask myself about all the different types of magnets and magnetic materials, how they truly differ. To my thinking at least the flux density in the gap and the resistance to demagnetization are two of the most important factors. Obviously the lowest force factor materials are the ceramic magnets at least by volume that would be the case. ALNICO would be one of the favored magnetic materials here just because it was used for so long as the magnet of choice for compression drivers, it had a fairly high temperature rating and high coercive force material. But if I remember correctly, don't hold me to this one, I think that Alnico has a habit to demagnetize if it is dropped, hard impact I think I remember, and it does seem to need to be re-magnetized over time. Neo doesn't demagnetize like that but it is rather brittle material so is harder to handle and can crack easily as it is a highly compressed power material. At the same time many Neo grades have fairly low heat resistance and will readily demagnetize if heated over their curie point but other grades have fairly high temperature resistance. So it is very important to the design where you use each of the magnetic materials and how the circuit is actually achieved.
I don't have any specific information on field coil speakers but to me that is just silly. Why would we want to go back to the very beginning, the coil then becomes another factor that you have to control. Voltage changes from the power source would modulate the magnetic field and now you have another electrical sub system that you have added to your speakers. Not my idea of a reasonable application in this day and age.
That is a question I often ask myself about all the different types of magnets and magnetic materials, how they truly differ. To my thinking at least the flux density in the gap and the resistance to demagnetization are two of the most important factors. Obviously the lowest force factor materials are the ceramic magnets at least by volume that would be the case. ALNICO would be one of the favored magnetic materials here just because it was used for so long as the magnet of choice for compression drivers, it had a fairly high temperature rating and high coercive force material. But if I remember correctly, don't hold me to this one, I think that Alnico has a habit to demagnetize if it is dropped, hard impact I think I remember, and it does seem to need to be re-magnetized over time. Neo doesn't demagnetize like that but it is rather brittle material so is harder to handle and can crack easily as it is a highly compressed power material. At the same time many Neo grades have fairly low heat resistance and will readily demagnetize if heated over their curie point but other grades have fairly high temperature resistance. So it is very important to the design where you use each of the magnetic materials and how the circuit is actually achieved.
I don't have any specific information on field coil speakers but to me that is just silly. Why would we want to go back to the very beginning, the coil then becomes another factor that you have to control. Voltage changes from the power source would modulate the magnetic field and now you have another electrical sub system that you have added to your speakers. Not my idea of a reasonable application in this day and age.
Be foil beats the vapour deposited metal. Sorry. Be diaphragms are too expensive period.
Hi Lynn,
Thank you.
Few years ago I had for a while a modern tube power amp, with only a pair of output tubes per channel. It had a switch on the chassis to switch between ultralinear and triode mode. To my memory, it was rated about 60W per channel on ultralinear mode and about 30W per channel on triode mode. Probably that high output power was attained by going high into class AB. Anyhow, I didn’t like its' sound ultralinear mode, I liked its' sound in triode mode, alas, in triode mode it didn't have enough power for my speakers. (Which may explain what I'm doing in this thread…).
I learned that soon after I came back to good-sounding playback system.
That's a tough call for me.
Right now I'm limited by the low efficiency of my present speakers and there is no way I'll be able to design speakers (limited by time, or age, and finances).
Thank you.
Few years ago I had for a while a modern tube power amp, with only a pair of output tubes per channel. It had a switch on the chassis to switch between ultralinear and triode mode. To my memory, it was rated about 60W per channel on ultralinear mode and about 30W per channel on triode mode. Probably that high output power was attained by going high into class AB. Anyhow, I didn’t like its' sound ultralinear mode, I liked its' sound in triode mode, alas, in triode mode it didn't have enough power for my speakers. (Which may explain what I'm doing in this thread…).
I learned that soon after I came back to good-sounding playback system.
That's a tough call for me.
Right now I'm limited by the low efficiency of my present speakers and there is no way I'll be able to design speakers (limited by time, or age, and finances).
Not my system.
Actually, most old recordings sound to me better than most new ones. Also, most LP's sound to me much better than most CD's – even of the same recordings.
Horisontal dual 15" config
Made some sawdust recently. This is a report from transistor amp and PC-based crossover territory. A quick mockup to gain hands-on experience with 15"s in a horisontal layout. The enclousures for the JBL 2035s is actually 4 midbass/bass units that I have been building for at club which have a very specific music profile, only playing rock from the 60s (they will be loaded with 2226 upon delivery). Changing back and forth between 2226 and 2035 confirmed my preference for 2035 in the 300-600 region.
The horns are LeCleach 200T from Autotech Poland, with JBL 2446 and original titanium dias. Tweeters are Yamaha JA4281. Crossovers at 600 and 7000.
The supertweeter "opens up" the soundstage and counteract any beaming from the huge LeCleachs. This is fun! For quick and dirty mockups like this, Audiolense is a valuable tool if you use the right settings. Bill Callahans baritone voice survives surprisingly intact beeing churned through a crossover at 600Hz.
Made some sawdust recently. This is a report from transistor amp and PC-based crossover territory. A quick mockup to gain hands-on experience with 15"s in a horisontal layout. The enclousures for the JBL 2035s is actually 4 midbass/bass units that I have been building for at club which have a very specific music profile, only playing rock from the 60s (they will be loaded with 2226 upon delivery). Changing back and forth between 2226 and 2035 confirmed my preference for 2035 in the 300-600 region.
The horns are LeCleach 200T from Autotech Poland, with JBL 2446 and original titanium dias. Tweeters are Yamaha JA4281. Crossovers at 600 and 7000.
The supertweeter "opens up" the soundstage and counteract any beaming from the huge LeCleachs. This is fun! For quick and dirty mockups like this, Audiolense is a valuable tool if you use the right settings. Bill Callahans baritone voice survives surprisingly intact beeing churned through a crossover at 600Hz.
Attachments
Last edited:
Joshua, do yourself a huge favor and contact the folks at Planet 10 Hi Fi. planet_10 hifi The owner is a moderator here and so he doesn't make many claims, but if you could stand to have some small venue speakers, 4 meters by 5 meters by 3 meters max for a listening room, it will be difficult to get a more musical sound. Not that you should give up on horns, just that what is on offer at Planet 10 may suit you. Additionally, if you haven't migrated to a lap top based music server, buy an inexpensive Windows 7 capable device, db power ripper, Foobar 2000 and an emu 0204 and plan to sell whatever CD transport you own, no matter the original price.
Hi,
Thank you.
1. I will not purchase loudspeakers without hearing them first, at my home, on my setup. So, a vendor in Canada isn't much useful.
2. The only thing my present loudspeakers fall short in is their low efficiency. I've heard speakers with better efficiency, but I didn't like their sound that much, not as much as I like the sound of my present speakers.
3. The size of my listening room is about 5 meters width (along which the 2 speakers are placed), 2.82 meters length (from the front wall near which the speakers are located to the rear wall near which I sit) and about 2.52 meter height. The room isn't closed by 4 walls, the back wall is only about 2.5 meters, after which there is opening to another space.
I don't listen to music from a PC. Anyhow, I've achieved excellent results with an altogether different PC configuration, soundcard and software. Should I listen to music from PC, I'll use the configuration that proved itself to me.
Given the above, what do you think of Denon's Ultra-High-Current (UHC) MOSFET amplifier line, initiated back in the early 'nineties with the no-holds-barred POA-S1 monoblocks (see: Denon POA-S1 on thevintageknob.org) and PMA-S1 integrated, and then trickled down to the various more affordable PMA-S10, PMA-2000/2010/2020... and even the 'anniversary edition' PMA-A100?
All of these use a single pair of power output devices, reportedly with the aim of limiting the low-level distortion of which you speak.
From my personal experience (with the PMA-S1 and then PMA-A100), these sound pretty sweet as far as transistor amps go.
Marco
It's a correct decision, especially with your current circumstances.
I think I know almost all kinds of sounds as a result of different topology in speakers, amplifiers and more. Speakers have compromises or priorities. If you like yours, it is not wise to replace them just because of efficiency. Amps are cheaper than speakers and even so if you go the DIY approach. There are high power options in pass labs forum. Ask people there!
If you have to find other speaker design, I think electrostatic could be suitable for you.
The key idea of the above advice is the use of external (USB) DAC, which will outperform your soundcard experience I believe.
Hi,
Thank you.
It seems to me that it's always correct, under all circumstances and for all sound setup gear, not only speakers.
I like the sound of my speakers, though I don't rule out that speakers can sound better.
AFAIK, there is no such thing as ideal speakers.
More efficient speakers will enable me to use low to medium power tube amp, which is much better than the best SS amp out there.
Should I replace my speakers, it will be either to better sounding ones, or to more efficient ones that will sound at least as good as my present ones (within the limits of my finances).
I own Pass Labs XA30.5 power amp, which doesn't lack power for my present speakers.
Should I have money and should I not find speakers which are more efficient and sound better than my present ones, I may upgrade to Pass Labs XA100.5.
I'll turn to DIY power amp only into low to medium power tube amp.
Phono stage and preamp I plan to DIY anyhow, regardless of speakers and power amp.
I didn't like the sound of the electrostatic speakers I heard, not more than the sound of my present speakers.
You have no idea what you are talking about, since you didn’t hear how my PC sounds in audio recording and reproduction.
Edit:
Anyhow, my present CD player, the AMR CD-777, has internal DAC with (also) USB input. I doubt if there is better sounding DAC within the limits of my finances.
Thank you.
It seems to me that it's always correct, under all circumstances and for all sound setup gear, not only speakers.
I like the sound of my speakers, though I don't rule out that speakers can sound better.
AFAIK, there is no such thing as ideal speakers.
More efficient speakers will enable me to use low to medium power tube amp, which is much better than the best SS amp out there.
Should I replace my speakers, it will be either to better sounding ones, or to more efficient ones that will sound at least as good as my present ones (within the limits of my finances).
I own Pass Labs XA30.5 power amp, which doesn't lack power for my present speakers.
Should I have money and should I not find speakers which are more efficient and sound better than my present ones, I may upgrade to Pass Labs XA100.5.
I'll turn to DIY power amp only into low to medium power tube amp.
Phono stage and preamp I plan to DIY anyhow, regardless of speakers and power amp.
I didn't like the sound of the electrostatic speakers I heard, not more than the sound of my present speakers.
You have no idea what you are talking about, since you didn’t hear how my PC sounds in audio recording and reproduction.
Edit:
Anyhow, my present CD player, the AMR CD-777, has internal DAC with (also) USB input. I doubt if there is better sounding DAC within the limits of my finances.
Last edited:
Seems you want to run two systems. This is always a good idea rather than one.
But my life, you are short of money but you have a state of art Pass Amp and you may upgrade to the XA 100.5. This would be throwing money away unless you want 130dB daily listening program, if it is going to used with your potential HE horn system. Too powerful for a small room.
But a revised HE triode amp would as you are probably planning, would be a good partner with HE speakers. But you have to sit away from any horn to get a coherent sound. Maybe you need a waveguide 2 way like Genelec.
Quality 24/192 soundcard output into the amp is going to be the best cost effective digital sound. CD players ? you know what they are like. I avoid them. Not paying $1000++ plus for a handful of low grade microchips fashioned into a biscuit tin.
Gary - how do the Neo-magnet Radians sound at low signal levels ? Do they have an equivalent level of tone and 'presence' to the 288-H at the lower-end of the range, ie. upper-mids ?