Hi,
Hmmmm...
Not sure if you're actually familiar with tube electronic circuits but here goes:
The major flaw of the JA200 (that's the one I was referring to in an earlier post) is that it used a simple cathode follower based around a 12AT7 (IIRC) to drive a disproportionate amount of KT88 which caused a treble roll off.
Add full class A bias and rather flaky Chinese KT88s and you have a fine recipe for disaster.
Yet, when it did work as it should it had little character of its own and you'd hardly notice the treble roll off.
Let's not forget the timescale, this was late 80's and a bold step in the right direction.
Ever since I've heard major US and European brands both SS and tube that, while sporting a far more extended HF bandwidth, didn't come close to the JA200 in the way that amp could pervey music.
What they all had in common though is a typical sonic signature across the range....I wonder how you'd measure that....
That said, I'm sure it's more comforting to most of us to hold an amp that measures well and plays a tune too but those are still the holy grail even to this very day. Measurements or not.
I suppose one could say the same about cables or passive components, right SY? 😀
Cheers, 😉
Hmmmm...
Not sure if you're actually familiar with tube electronic circuits but here goes:
The major flaw of the JA200 (that's the one I was referring to in an earlier post) is that it used a simple cathode follower based around a 12AT7 (IIRC) to drive a disproportionate amount of KT88 which caused a treble roll off.
Add full class A bias and rather flaky Chinese KT88s and you have a fine recipe for disaster.
Yet, when it did work as it should it had little character of its own and you'd hardly notice the treble roll off.
Let's not forget the timescale, this was late 80's and a bold step in the right direction.
Ever since I've heard major US and European brands both SS and tube that, while sporting a far more extended HF bandwidth, didn't come close to the JA200 in the way that amp could pervey music.
What they all had in common though is a typical sonic signature across the range....I wonder how you'd measure that....
That said, I'm sure it's more comforting to most of us to hold an amp that measures well and plays a tune too but those are still the holy grail even to this very day. Measurements or not.
I suppose one could say the same about cables or passive components, right SY? 😀
Cheers, 😉
Other than the gross slewing distortion. And ringing. And high output impedance. But.. they were French! And expensive! And shiny!
As Frank stated, the JA-200's were a special amplifiers that portrayed the musical experience like few other ever have still to this day. What ever their faults, it is still obvious they did the important things right and that is replicate the soul of real music. If you do not recognize that and strive to achieve that part of what they did in any amplifier design, I could really care less about how anything measures. There is obviously something that Jadis understood and built into these amps that very few have been able to achieve since, IMO and many others. Flawed, yes, but musically on the right path.
Well, if gross slewing problems, execrable power bandwidth, incipient instability, non-flat frequency response, and ringing are "musical truth" to you, that's certainly your right to believe so. Every time I've listened to them, I found their sound to be quite consistent with their measurements- terribly colored.
Hi,
I take it you don't like anything French be it it escargots or amplifiers but I can't help but notice you still trust passive components as being totally benign?
In the meantime we're still waiting, almost five years by now, for any logical explanation other than LCR differences, as to why cables could sound different from one another.
As someone else said, no balls, no glory.
If people must keep on believing that any real world C, R or L are just that and nothing else then I pity them for they live in a world that would make no distinction between one tomato or another.
That, my friend, is not my world.😎
Cheers, 😉
I take it you don't like anything French be it it escargots or amplifiers but I can't help but notice you still trust passive components as being totally benign?
In the meantime we're still waiting, almost five years by now, for any logical explanation other than LCR differences, as to why cables could sound different from one another.
As someone else said, no balls, no glory.
If people must keep on believing that any real world C, R or L are just that and nothing else then I pity them for they live in a world that would make no distinction between one tomato or another.
That, my friend, is not my world.😎
Cheers, 😉
For once I have to agree with you SY!
I spent a few hours with these amps powering a pair of Audiolab 1 electrostatics.........over warm, distorted, veiled, congested. Oh, the rest of the front end was familiar to me and has I know none of these attributes....or was the fault with the matching pre-amp? Naturally it would be against my principles to know anything of the measurements!!
I also suspect that Frank is wrong regarding ALL things French! Especially if SY received a case of a good vintage claret!
Last edited:
If someone can not hear the difference between a teflon capacitor and a polyprop capacitor, I have little doubt that they could hear the difference in anything that has to do with good hi-fi. Their system is incapable of resolving what to me and others is a very obvious difference in sonics between these two types of passive components. I would then have to determine that the design is being overwhelmed by other issues that dilute these differences. What would it do to music............
In doing the EQ test, you'd have to find a baseline. You might have to EQ and level adjust one or the other, depending on how they measure.
It's better, I think, to EQ the zip cord, just to avoid any objections of "oh, that lousy EQ screwed up my wonderful fancy cable."
Yeah, but I was thinking of level matching mostly. But yes, EQ the inferior cable to try to get it to match the better cable.
How 'bout Sophie Marceau?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
se
Really? I would bet that you can hear the difference between high-L low-C cable and low-L high-C cable. Try some zip cord vs. Kimber with a tube amplifier. This can account for "significant" (~.1-.3dB) variations in response. For an even better example, try some high power coaxial cable with a second-tier Williamson amp (or a Jadis) -- Instability should be audibly discernible.
Caveat - I hear differences between speaker cables only with 1) highly directional and 2) flat-response speakers. Modern MTMs, etc., where room interaction is not as significant. I cannot personally identify differences through vintage speakers. If the speaker has +/- 5dB bumps in the response, I don't think a +/- .2dB change due to cables will be readily apparent 😉
BTW, even the Audio Critic acknowledges that some crazy cables will lead to significant frequency response deviations for LCR reasons: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_16_r.pdf.
I see no reason why these shouldn't be audible if the speaker / room are sufficiently "flat".
Last edited:
Try some zip cord vs. Kimber with a tube amplifier. This can account for "significant" (~.1-.3dB) variations in response. For an even better example, try some high power coaxial cable with a second-tier Williamson amp (or a Jadis) -- Instability should be audibly discernible.
(snip)
BTW, even the Audio Critic acknowledges that some crazy cables will lead to significant frequency response deviations for LCR reasons: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_16_r.pdf.
I see no reason why these shouldn't be audible if the speaker / room are sufficiently "flat".
I know it's too much to expect that someone will wade through all 7000 posts of this thread, but these were all points I've made several times. No-one disagrees with these mundane, mainstream factors- the extraordinary claim is that, absent amp instabilities (true for 99% of amps out there) and gross frequency response errors (easily corrected with $0.50 worth of components), audible differences between cables remain. That's the faith-based part.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.