I hate hum. Good I am not started yet and only in the preparation phase. Then I can take all precautions to avoid hum! ….will need mu-metal everywhere…..maybe even for the chassis 🙂 ….sandwich of mu-metal/copper/steel…. 3 x 10 mm. Should be bullet proof.
I haven't shielded the Edcor but the mains transformer is. The chassis is the small F5X project and is very tight. I need to buy some of that mu metal tape.
You may find substantial differences between the sounds of the boards.
Two of the boards (Tucson, Norwood) include integrated circuits and the other three boards (Ishikawa, Austin, Mountain View) do not use ICs. It's my guess that if you build and listen to the boards, in alternating order
1. Listen to an IPS daughter card WITHOUT ICs
2. Listen to a different daughter card with ICs
3. Listen to a 3rd daughter card WITHOUT ICs
4. Listen to a 4th daughter card with ICs
5. Listen to the 5th daughter card WITHOT ICs
... then I'm guessing you will have a greater possibility of hearing differences between them. Part of this might be because you expect to hear differences, between all-discrete circuits and integrated circuits. Part of this might be because the IC daughter cards have very large amounts of global feedback, while the discrete component daughter cards have zero global feedback. And you expect giant variations in the amount of global feedback, to produce some kind of sonic difference.
The Norwood have actually been in there longer than that, about 2 weeks, but I did move the M2x to the main system to compare it to a friends brand new SIT-3 he recently acquired and brought to my house yesterday.
The M2x was, as is not surprising looking at the topology, very is similar in sound to the SIT-3 and really enjoyed the opportunity to hear both next to each other. Did the SIT-3 have a slight advantage sonically? I think so, but also expected it due to the never-before-made and never-again-available SemiSouth/Pass SIT transistors... The M2x/Norwood was holding it's own very, very well. 😎
I've been listening to my M2x with Mark's Tucson boards for the past few weeks. Prior to installing the Tucsons, I had been using Ishikawa boards as my reference. (My thoughts on the other boards can be found on post #886 of this thread.)
I'm hesitant to say that there are huge differences between the various input boards, but there are certainly subtleties that can be detected with prolonged listening. What I noticed with the Tuscon boards was a feeling that there was improved clarity and definition, like a film had been wiped off of a window allowing a clearer view. Why? I don't know, but as Mark suggests, just try for yourself and see what you like. I have no desire to remove the Tucson boards soon.
Happy listening!
Wil
Um, WKCox if you mean the red PCBs that were part of a Group Buy, those were Norwood boards rather than Tucsons.
I suspect you saved Norwood for last because it is a surface mount assembly. But it sure does sound good (in my opinion).
I suspect you saved Norwood for last because it is a surface mount assembly. But it sure does sound good (in my opinion).
My mistake! Brain fade. Yes, I was referring to the Norwood boards, which were from the Group Buy, in my post above. Sorry for any confusion.
The speakers were we placed in my listening room in a place that excites the room nodes the minimum i can determine, while still providing for good imaging and minimum boundary effects.
The preamp was connected to the amplifier and the source and selected the playback volume to a level that was very pleasing.
My source played a lot of music that is in my collection that I enjoy, and also a few selections that were chosen to highlight certain sonic characteristics, but mainly the source was playing wonderful and beautiful music.
Just received the rear panel kit, is it normal for the RCAs to be off square on the rear panel? I'm using the pre drilled 4U 300 case.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=737580&stc=1&d=1550617148
Just had a thought, am I supposed to mount them from the inside?
But the chassis holes are not countersunk.
Just had a thought, am I supposed to mount them from the inside?
But the chassis holes are not countersunk.
Attachments
I surface mounted mine as well, though they had 4 through holes for mounting screws and I was able to rotate it and get it mounted square.
Didn't think about mounting from the inside, believe I'll try that with mine as it would probably look better.
Functionally, all that is required to get it nailed on there somehow without any shorts to the chassis so satisfy your sense of esthetics and move on.
Didn't think about mounting from the inside, believe I'll try that with mine as it would probably look better.
Functionally, all that is required to get it nailed on there somehow without any shorts to the chassis so satisfy your sense of esthetics and move on.
I think you have the back panel facing the wrong way.
Try taking the hardware off, turn the panel around and remount the parts.
The screws should be at the upper left and lower right corners.
Try taking the hardware off, turn the panel around and remount the parts.
The screws should be at the upper left and lower right corners.
Last edited: