Does anyone know the Alps RK163 potentiometers? - Page 2

jean-paul · 26th January 2004, 09:35 PM

They could have left out the opamps too ... I know X-pre and that one uses a opamp and a tube too. Weird if you ask me.

Peter Daniel · 26th January 2004, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sobazz
... that cannot be! Simply not possible! They could at least have chosen RK17!

I wouldn't assume anything at this point. I've heard Nagra is using cheap pot in their $6k preamp because it simply sounds better than anything else they tried. I also had some cheap Alps (different style though) and they sounded better than Black Beauty.

sobazz · 26th January 2004, 09:56 PM

"Sound better"... I objected to the use of RK09 only due to tracking imperfertions... and tracking imperfections - I guess - is a great deal of the reason why people bother buy RK27 or RK40 (maybe even RK50).

Regarding sound quality.. you can always use a series resistor and a cheap pot for shunting a part of the signal to ground. I suppose we agree that it would be the optimal pot configuration, since no questionable pot is present directly in the signal path, thus you can easily use a cheap pot if configured correctly. But the tracking issue is still present...

Peter Daniel · 26th January 2004, 10:11 PM

Surprisingly it may sound, but the shunting part is also very influential on the sound. As to the matching problems, you can always get more of those cheap pots and do matching yourself.

26th January 2004, 09:35 PM	#11
jean-paul diyAudio Moderator Emeritus Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Germany	They could have left out the opamps too ... I know X-pre and that one uses a opamp and a tube too. Weird if you ask me. __________________ It's only audio

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Source for Alps RK16 RK163 Pots???	Zero Cool	Everything Else	0	6th March 2008 01:01 PM
Potentiometers	BlairHatcher	Chip Amps	22	9th February 2005 12:24 AM
Fake Alps potentiometers	chalky	Parts	2	20th December 2004 02:39 PM
Potentiometers	slogan2112	Solid State	2	19th December 2003 06:54 AM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

26th January 2004, 09:56 PM	#13
sobazz diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Jutland	"Sound better"... I objected to the use of RK09 only due to tracking imperfertions... and tracking imperfections - I guess - is a great deal of the reason why people bother buy RK27 or RK40 (maybe even RK50). Regarding sound quality.. you can always use a series resistor and a cheap pot for shunting a part of the signal to ground. I suppose we agree that it would be the optimal pot configuration, since no questionable pot is present directly in the signal path, thus you can easily use a cheap pot if configured correctly. But the tracking issue is still present...

26th January 2004, 10:11 PM	#14
Peter Daniel diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Toronto, Canada	Surprisingly it may sound, but the shunting part is also very influential on the sound. As to the matching problems, you can always get more of those cheap pots and do matching yourself.