Oh, now you've got me started.
I don't like Rotel, but the reasons are strictly personal.
I like Sony and Pioneer. Sony makes very good product
as does Pioneer, all things considered.
Sony is a very good customer of mine, and for that I'm
quite grateful, but it doesn't influence this endorsement.
Pioneer did a rip on one of my patents, but they still make
great products. (See how objective I am?)
I don't like Rotel, but the reasons are strictly personal.
I like Sony and Pioneer. Sony makes very good product
as does Pioneer, all things considered.
Sony is a very good customer of mine, and for that I'm
quite grateful, but it doesn't influence this endorsement.
Pioneer did a rip on one of my patents, but they still make
great products. (See how objective I am?)
hi Mr. Pass,
yes, i remember Sony was using your monoblocks at the 2001 Stereophile show (X600's?). they sounded very good indeed. i was disappointed to see they used Manley tube monoblocks this year. i got that old-fashioned colored tube sound and missed the neutrality of the X amps. oh well.
yes, i remember Sony was using your monoblocks at the 2001 Stereophile show (X600's?). they sounded very good indeed. i was disappointed to see they used Manley tube monoblocks this year. i got that old-fashioned colored tube sound and missed the neutrality of the X amps. oh well.
...after you squeezed 'em for how much?
hehe.I agree with this. I've worked with engineers from many different consumer companies, and the Sony engineers are among the best... knowledgeable, hard working, professional, and very serious about their product. Sony does an especially thorough QA during development. Although Pioneer is also a customer, I have yet to work with them. From my limited experience outside of work, their products seem well engineered by and large. I'm sure I'll be seeing more and more of them as DVRs become become mainstream. As for other companies, well there are quite a few which are under-appreciated. At the other end of the scale, on a few occasions I've had to hand-hold Senior Engineers through relatively basic tasks. Sometimes it's just the individual, but makes you scratch your head...
It is also easy for me to appreciate how a given company can produce a wide range of products with inconsistent quality levels. Large consumer companies are just that - <i>large</i>. Big corporations often have so many divisions and development groups even within a single product division, that it is easy for the engineering standards to vary widely within the company. Some companies are better at controlling this than others, but it always exists to some extent. This internal partitioning can cause other problems too... divisions competing with each other in the market, supply problems, "manufacturing vs. engineering vs. marketing / management", or poor cooperation and even politics between groups messing up product schedules and so on. In any case, one of the first things I do now when I buy some new gizmo is open it up to have a look inside (well duh, I'm a curious DIYer... why wouldn't I?). But, I'm often checking for basic indicators of how well engineered the thing is. Chances are, a single design team did the product, and if you find examples of really top-notch engineering here and there, you can be relatively assured that the product as a whole has been well designed. Or, if you find some obvious design flaws, it could be cause for concern, maybe even a prompt refund.
As for Rotel, I've been very happy with my RCD-951 over the years. It was only recently de-throned by my hacked-up Sony DVP-NS500V SACD box. The 951 is just showing it's age... the Burr-Brown DACs and opamps are outdated, but a survey of the internals reveals a linear power supply with good size caps, a Sony loader and front-end, discrete master clock oscillator, PMD-100 HDCD filter chip, and a peppering of Black Gate caps around the analog section. Signal-path caps and resistors are good quality, and board layout is quite good. At this point, I'm thinking just a few simple parts changes would bring this sucker right up to a performance level I can happily live with, at least as a secondary system.
Whuflungdung Upgrade
Dorkus, I am having some rather acceptably good sonic results lately by just doing a dumb, blind, blanket change of electrolytic caps on some brand new gear.
Some coupling and decoupling caps I doubled in value, and all were replaced with the highest voltage rating cap that would physically fit within the layout and lead-wire holes. (I have also drilled an appropriate diameter and located hole to accomodate a wider lead spacing replacement cap in other experiments/servicing).
The caps I have been using are Black and Gold clad Hitano EXR series.pdf low esr smps caps, and Dark Green and Gold clothed Jamicon WG series.pdf low esr smps.
In my experience so far, just doing a dumb blanket change of electrolytics to modern nice quality low esr ones(all from the same mfgr, type and voltage rating if possible) will flip a very significant sonic switch, and so far in many experimental examples the change is entirely beneficial immediately. (there is a run-in period too).
I haven't tried a recent naked* capacitor listening test - soon.
Due to availabilities, I have mainly used the Hitanos and they sound quite good, and more recently some Jamicons and I reckon they sound nicer (less wrong) and their specs are also better.
I believe that the specific liquid electrolyte compound and paper used imparts particular electrical (and sonic) characteristics, and that these are proprietary formulas, and not revealed by the manufacturers.
You can do swapouts circuit stage by circuit stage and/or circuit application and listen over a period of 1 or 2 days and note new changes.
The time period is for capacitor and new solder reforming/running in, and listening to enough favorite tracks to establish and memorize correlations and impressions.
Interesting also is the order of changes - psu bypass caps cause one change, series coupling caps another change, signal shunting caps another effect, and according to the particular stage.
Most modern cad designed electronics (meaning mass produced audio and visual) nowadays is pretty close enough to the electrical/electronic perfection required for the job at hand, and is lastly and significantly strongly influenced by variables like electrolytic capacitor type, solder alloy type, pcb material, and enclosure material.
If you buy a Denon or a Rotel or Sony or Panasonic or Pioneer or Whuflungdung machine you can voice it easily by changing the caps, and quite probably end up with something that you can happily live with.
The mostly punter customers of mine have all remarked later that their machine is more likable after I have selectively upgraded caps during a breakdown repair.
If you send enough of typical Jap audio over the service bench and then listen, you come to establish reasons for the inhouse sonic flavours/traits of all the individul major manufacturers.
Dorkus, this is a quick and easy and economical way to temper a machine that you like but don't like.
I suggest that you do electro cap tweaking before ANY other changes and signal stages before supplies. (The more dirt in the system, the more an electros sonic effects are evident and the quicker you can home in on electros caused sonics problems).
Eric.
Naked* - the capacitors shamelessly naked, not necessarily me. 😉
dorkus said:
Dorkus, I am having some rather acceptably good sonic results lately by just doing a dumb, blind, blanket change of electrolytic caps on some brand new gear.
Some coupling and decoupling caps I doubled in value, and all were replaced with the highest voltage rating cap that would physically fit within the layout and lead-wire holes. (I have also drilled an appropriate diameter and located hole to accomodate a wider lead spacing replacement cap in other experiments/servicing).
The caps I have been using are Black and Gold clad Hitano EXR series.pdf low esr smps caps, and Dark Green and Gold clothed Jamicon WG series.pdf low esr smps.
In my experience so far, just doing a dumb blanket change of electrolytics to modern nice quality low esr ones(all from the same mfgr, type and voltage rating if possible) will flip a very significant sonic switch, and so far in many experimental examples the change is entirely beneficial immediately. (there is a run-in period too).
I haven't tried a recent naked* capacitor listening test - soon.
Due to availabilities, I have mainly used the Hitanos and they sound quite good, and more recently some Jamicons and I reckon they sound nicer (less wrong) and their specs are also better.
I believe that the specific liquid electrolyte compound and paper used imparts particular electrical (and sonic) characteristics, and that these are proprietary formulas, and not revealed by the manufacturers.
You can do swapouts circuit stage by circuit stage and/or circuit application and listen over a period of 1 or 2 days and note new changes.
The time period is for capacitor and new solder reforming/running in, and listening to enough favorite tracks to establish and memorize correlations and impressions.
Interesting also is the order of changes - psu bypass caps cause one change, series coupling caps another change, signal shunting caps another effect, and according to the particular stage.
Most modern cad designed electronics (meaning mass produced audio and visual) nowadays is pretty close enough to the electrical/electronic perfection required for the job at hand, and is lastly and significantly strongly influenced by variables like electrolytic capacitor type, solder alloy type, pcb material, and enclosure material.
If you buy a Denon or a Rotel or Sony or Panasonic or Pioneer or Whuflungdung machine you can voice it easily by changing the caps, and quite probably end up with something that you can happily live with.
The mostly punter customers of mine have all remarked later that their machine is more likable after I have selectively upgraded caps during a breakdown repair.
If you send enough of typical Jap audio over the service bench and then listen, you come to establish reasons for the inhouse sonic flavours/traits of all the individul major manufacturers.
Dorkus, this is a quick and easy and economical way to temper a machine that you like but don't like.
I suggest that you do electro cap tweaking before ANY other changes and signal stages before supplies. (The more dirt in the system, the more an electros sonic effects are evident and the quicker you can home in on electros caused sonics problems).
Eric.
Naked* - the capacitors shamelessly naked, not necessarily me. 😉
i agree changing 'lytics can greatly improve sound quality, i do it all the time. i fact, i even replaced the power supply filter caps in my $100 Yamaha computer speakers, from generic 3300uF to 4700uF Nichicon Muse, and even there i could hear the difference - a smoother, more natural, more dynamic sound.
as good as it is however, parts substitution can only go so far, and in some cases you are just playing around with different types of colorations with different parts (all parts are colored). sort of like how some kids like to sup up old Honda Civics. you can put big wheels, turbochargers, change transmissions and exhausts, etc. etc., but in the end it's still a Honda Civic. Nelson Pass hints at this by specifying very commonplace parts in his Zen projects: yes you can improve them further by upgrading parts but the essence of the thing is in the basic design. in the case of the Rotel, there is significant "information" being lost in the very non-purist signal path, what with the tone controls and all, and cap upgrades won't really help retrieve that.
that said, i'm still looking to possibly upgrade the Rotel. my main concern is the extra stuff in the signal path that i could possibly bypass. the cap substitutions are another good step, along with opamp swaps. i'll have to give Rotel a ring to see if they'll send me the service manual though.
as good as it is however, parts substitution can only go so far, and in some cases you are just playing around with different types of colorations with different parts (all parts are colored). sort of like how some kids like to sup up old Honda Civics. you can put big wheels, turbochargers, change transmissions and exhausts, etc. etc., but in the end it's still a Honda Civic. Nelson Pass hints at this by specifying very commonplace parts in his Zen projects: yes you can improve them further by upgrading parts but the essence of the thing is in the basic design. in the case of the Rotel, there is significant "information" being lost in the very non-purist signal path, what with the tone controls and all, and cap upgrades won't really help retrieve that.
that said, i'm still looking to possibly upgrade the Rotel. my main concern is the extra stuff in the signal path that i could possibly bypass. the cap substitutions are another good step, along with opamp swaps. i'll have to give Rotel a ring to see if they'll send me the service manual though.
Upgrading parts
Dorkus,
What you say is most probably right, even if sometimes a color change makes all the difference.
But you can take it all one step further if you make serious changes on the active parts you use, going for better chips, along with important supply upgrades. Don't you think?
Carlos
Dorkus,
What you say is most probably right, even if sometimes a color change makes all the difference.
But you can take it all one step further if you make serious changes on the active parts you use, going for better chips, along with important supply upgrades. Don't you think?
Carlos
Re: Upgrading parts
true, but i am still stuck with the same basic circuit topology, PCB layout, etc. nothing i can really do about radiated noise, excessively long PCB traces, poor component choices (e.g. volume control IC), etc. still, if i can get my hands on the service manual, i'll probably retrofit everything i can within reason. i don't hold much hope for getting decent analog preamp performance (that's what Son of Dork is for anyway) but maybe i can improve movie sound appreciably. switching out the generic opamps for AD825/8260 or at least better BB parts is probably a pretty safe bet.
true, but i am still stuck with the same basic circuit topology, PCB layout, etc. nothing i can really do about radiated noise, excessively long PCB traces, poor component choices (e.g. volume control IC), etc. still, if i can get my hands on the service manual, i'll probably retrofit everything i can within reason. i don't hold much hope for getting decent analog preamp performance (that's what Son of Dork is for anyway) but maybe i can improve movie sound appreciably. switching out the generic opamps for AD825/8260 or at least better BB parts is probably a pretty safe bet.
I have no qualms with Pionneer, I have a CLD702 and a CLD99 and a DSII Reciever. I agree they make some excellent products, but I still contend that Sony have made some questionable product decisions in thier time. I have a Sony DD Decoder that is a reasonable product, I owned a STR-70 Reciever that was not.
But then again I am pretty sore at Sony for recently announcing the end of thier Super Beta (Tape) program. One of the best VCR's I have ever owned was a Sony SL-HF350 Super Beta PCM deck with the matching outboard PCM decoder.
Pop quiz. Who invented and filed the first patents for VHS recording technology?
Anthony
Nope
They produced the first viable commercially available product, but they did not invent the technology. They bought the patent.
Anthony
You are correct.
You see the brilliant Sony people came up with the idea of vertical scanning on 1 inch tape first and filed a patent. The they decided it was not up to thier standards so they went back to the drawing boards and came up with helical scanning. JVC approached Sony about buying production rights for a home use format for Beta technology. Well Sony said not a chance, but we will sell you "VHS" snicker snicker. Well as history tells the story, JVC spanked Sony in the marketplace.
Thanks for playing
Anthony
Classic White Elephants
Only because technicians that you asked at the time said that VHS is better, mainly because the early VHS mechanisms were easier to service and much easier to align.
Early Beta servicing required an expensive dial run-out guage to set the position and centralisation of the roltary head disc assembly.
If you were lucky you got it within limits first go, or more usually dicked around for half an hour to get it down to the microns tolerances allowable.
Also Beta is more critical of guide alignment and pinch roller condition.
VHS by contarast was a process of just dropping the rotary head drum into place and tweaking the entry and exit guides a bit, and the fast result is correct enough alignment without scopes, jigs or run-out guages.
Workshop time is money, and fiddly and sensitive mechanisms and adjustments lose popularity real fast.
Ask any technician at the time which was the better picture and of course you'd get the answer Beta.
Another reason was the more common availability of hire movies on VHS.
Another reason was that anything that Sony built at the time was well engineered, built to last and relatively expensive, and other cheaper manufacturers who were granted VHS licences came out with lower cost machines to satisfy the domestic market, stole the market share and ran with it.
The rest ofcourse is history.
I still have some top shelf Beta machines in my archives that I might restore oneday for making camera tape master copies (I have a U-Matic for that too, come to think of it), but when it comes down to it my modern (5 years) Panasonic machine does a perfectly fine job, and is perfectly reliable.
Eric.
Probably by the time I get around to restoring those masterpieces of electro-mechanical engineering, Dvd burners will be easier, faster, better aned cheaper.........Sigh.
Eric.
Only because technicians that you asked at the time said that VHS is better, mainly because the early VHS mechanisms were easier to service and much easier to align.
Early Beta servicing required an expensive dial run-out guage to set the position and centralisation of the roltary head disc assembly.
If you were lucky you got it within limits first go, or more usually dicked around for half an hour to get it down to the microns tolerances allowable.
Also Beta is more critical of guide alignment and pinch roller condition.
VHS by contarast was a process of just dropping the rotary head drum into place and tweaking the entry and exit guides a bit, and the fast result is correct enough alignment without scopes, jigs or run-out guages.
Workshop time is money, and fiddly and sensitive mechanisms and adjustments lose popularity real fast.
Ask any technician at the time which was the better picture and of course you'd get the answer Beta.
Another reason was the more common availability of hire movies on VHS.
Another reason was that anything that Sony built at the time was well engineered, built to last and relatively expensive, and other cheaper manufacturers who were granted VHS licences came out with lower cost machines to satisfy the domestic market, stole the market share and ran with it.
The rest ofcourse is history.
I still have some top shelf Beta machines in my archives that I might restore oneday for making camera tape master copies (I have a U-Matic for that too, come to think of it), but when it comes down to it my modern (5 years) Panasonic machine does a perfectly fine job, and is perfectly reliable.
Eric.
Probably by the time I get around to restoring those masterpieces of electro-mechanical engineering, Dvd burners will be easier, faster, better aned cheaper.........Sigh.
Eric.
i have also heard that the "software availabililty" advantage of VHS was really centered around pornography. because VHS duplication machines were so much cheaper it was very easy for small porn shops to produce and sell tapes, and this contributed to the popularity of the format. at least, this is what one of my friends claims, and he was not joking. could be another one of those "urban legends" though, but hey, porn always sells. after all, what's the single consistently-profitable internet business?
So we all agree Beta is technically superior to Beta Though?
I still think Sony goofed by not using VHS as an entry product to get market share and Beta for Hig End applications. I think thier arrogance in the earlier years was a big part of this marketing blunder, in my opinion of course.
Anthony
Good Feedback, Mr. Feedback
I still think Sony goofed by not using VHS as an entry product to get market share and Beta for Hig End applications. I think thier arrogance in the earlier years was a big part of this marketing blunder, in my opinion of course.
Anthony
Good Feedback, Mr. Feedback
Coulomb ... what about now ... SACD vs DVD-A? History repeating? I know ... this might require a new thread.
please not here...
i really don't want to start that DVD-A vs. SACD argument here. if you want to hear arguments (good, bad, or otherwise), just go to the Hi-Rez forum on audioasylum.com, or find another thread here. i am so sick of the debate though. 🙄 (just venting...)
as for Beta...
it was a great format and a testament to Sony engineering prowess.
i really don't want to start that DVD-A vs. SACD argument here. if you want to hear arguments (good, bad, or otherwise), just go to the Hi-Rez forum on audioasylum.com, or find another thread here. i am so sick of the debate though. 🙄 (just venting...)
as for Beta...
it was a great format and a testament to Sony engineering prowess.- Status
- Not open for further replies.