Although I lurk conscientiously, I haven't had much to contribute of late because my system has "stabilized" and anyway I'm too broke to change anything, even though I know I need "better" speakers. I turned on the juice today, after not listening for a couple of weeks at all. I was both amazed and pleased. The analytical mind was absent...just the ears were present. So why this topic? just a little contribution since I see there are new people on board and since I just feel like sharing my experience. Well that is all true but also since I feel like I am in a minority of one and most of what goes on concerns tubes and more tubes and I feel decidedly unconcerned, having made my choice and having no reason to doubt that. In fact, the whole constant topic about tube-rolling, here and elsewhere, gives me a splitting headache (choices) and makes me grateful I didn't got that way.
For those of you who don't remember or know, I went the route of a very tweaked-out, integrated ICE amplifier. It would be boring to go thru the whole story again. Suffice to say that if you take an ICE module, preferably the sweet spot which I think is the lower powered one like mine (2X75 W), tweak it to the gills and pay very careful attention to interconnects (yes Dorothy, cable do make a huge difference), what you get back is a sound that can hold it's own in very elite company. How do I know this? because I have a friend who is very knowledgeable, of years experience...who has an extremely special and like-wise tweaked set of SET amps, straight-wired to mono pots and after hours of comparing, with all kinds of music, we can only hear the difference by being audiophile nutters who listen for the sound of a squirrel scratching his left ear in the far left corner or slightly nearer the speakers. The scratch is just as tuneful, tone-full, dynamic and musical, which ever amps we use. Just offering my opinion guys. Tubes do not rule. It's just one of several paths to the same end. Over and out
I have a somewhat similar philosophy. I often hear how "tonality" is king, and I agree. However, if you are in this hobby and equipment you are buying have tonality issues then there is a problem. So for my purposes, tonality is a given.
Moving on to the next stage is extension. Sure, you can enjoy chamber music on single driver speakers, but if you are into all aspects of music like I am them I need both top and bottom end extension in my rig. This is not a given and has to be worked at to get it right. Sure, a sub will not only improve the bottom end extension but it also seems to open up the top end. Adding weight to the bottom opens up the top? Yup, it's all about balance. But that top end needs to be pure and sweet and extended, and the bottom needs to be tuneful and not one note bass. This is also where I think dymanics play a role, at least the macro kind. Of course that's all about amp-speaker pairing as well as extension. This is where high end components, and tweaking, seems to make a hell of a difference too.
Thirdly, its about space, ambiance, soundstaging, air .. those hard to qualify and quantify little things that are the difference between a good system and a great system. Room treatments and the room itself, speaker placement, tube rolling, teflon caps, better interconnects and speaker cables, power conditioning, power cords, etc. all make a difference in this regard. This is where the hobby gets interesting and where your own subjecting and objective opinion, as well as your budget, come into play. This is for you and you alone to decide relative importance and satisfaction. It also means you need to balance detailed presentation with musical satisfaction. Warmth with transparency. Beauty with analytical capability. We each see these things differently. Unfortunately this is also where you see many arguments occur in the forums. But ultimately it's your ears (and pocketbook) that need to decide what is right for this third element. Get this right and you can sit back and just enjoy things and banish that nervosa. Or can you. This is the tweak spot, where it always seems like it can be just a little better. Just a little bit more micro-dynamic ... oops, I seem to have lost <whatever> now.
Oh well, it is a hobby, so if you're not (eventually) doing something else differently, or experimenting with another cable or tube, or hearing another system that does something just a bit better tyhan yours and trying to emulate it, then you will be bored. But I do enjoy those periods when I am not thinking of that and just enjoying music.
Sand or glass can reward us with glorious sound. There is no clear winner.
Saying that, exposure to many different systems or components over the years allows one to discern their likes and dislikes in audio reproduction.
In general it is the synergy of said components wether sand or glass that give us the final result. Different is usually the outcome. Now what is preferred is subjective. There can be no clear winner in general just for the listener.
What sounds good in one system can sound awful in another. One size does not fit all.
Tweakers like glass as it allows them to dabble with NOS tubes and the brand of the day. It can be fun and rewarding. As well as frustrating and expensive. Sand offers convenience and is usually less expensive in the long run.
So I guess whatever floats your sonic desires within ones budget. Sand or glass the choice is yours no one is better than the other. Just what the listener prefers.
charles
SMA
It's refreshing to see someone "go against the grain" every once in a while, Shep. At the same time, before this escalates into a battle on whether "tube be or not tube be" (I'm sure William Shakespeare just rolled over in his grave! :shock: ) all of us need to remind ourselves that our beloved hobby is NOT a matter of "right or wrong", but of what each of us prefer.
Anyway, the real point I wanted to make here is about critical listening vs. just enjoying the music. In expectations of my Von Schweikert VR-4 Gen.III speakers being packed up (soon I hope) to send in for upgrades, I bought an inexpensive pair of Onix X-Omni speakers at a close-out price as a temporary replacement. I know they (the X-Omni's) are in no way as capable as my VR-4's are, but they will give me something to listen to while my Von's are gone.
The X-Omni's have been hooked up for about two weeks now (nice little floor-standers BTW) and I guess since my expectations are lowered (compared to my VR-4's) I don't find the need to analyze every little thing right now. I just have been "kickin' back" and listening to the music, NOT my system. No tweaking, no adjusting, no concentrating on specific audiophile "cues" in a recording - just put something on and enjoy it. :thumb: I don't even bother with always having to be "in the sweet spot" anymore! I find that it's much more relaxing to sit in my old comfy recliner (which is far off to the right of my right speaker) and just lose myself in the music!
Maybe my approach to audio has been all wrong for all of these years!?! :duh
Good topic and good posts guys!
I enjoy tube listening on occasion, tubes make good space and natural treble and of course they make sonic glow. But 90% of my listening is on my friend Sol's i60 integrated SS amp. It is the most natural treble of any SS amp I've heard, plus stomping macho bass and utterly clean and neutral midrange. No excitement or romance (a little in the bass) but the music is better served by lower distortion. When I started in hifi I liked being entertained by the equipment, so tubes are a big part of that. Lately I recoil from the cost of equipment entertainment and long for simpler higher value appliance for music listening. That's why I diy. Usually you have to pay much more for SS to sound as good as tubes, but with Sol's designs that is not true. The i60 costs a fraction of my tube amps, even a fraction of any tube amp. Another reason I prefer SS for most of the listening is that I can leave it on all the time without guilt of wasting tube life, and without wasting energy on tube heat. My amps are turned on at 7am and turned off at 10-11pm. When I did that with tubes I had to retube every 10 months. The bass response is the biggest reason for me to use SS. Detail is not just for midrange, and low freqs need low impedance amp to make detail.
But I keep the tubes for now, thinking that they have some kind of magic that brings the music to a higher level, for special occasion listening. And when I do switch to tubes the feeling of magic is confirmed. It is 3rd order harmonic distortion, and I can hear it but it is fun. I can't really afford to keep it just for occasional fun, but I keep it, so there must be something about power tubes that keeps me hangin on.
I think it was in the recent Absolute Sound that someone (Robert Harley-?) said that at the state of the art level, both tubes and SS have more or less reached an equilibrium. They both sound exceptional, and very similar. SS gets the textures right now and tubes get the control now.
But of course, we are all/mostly playing in the dregs of what used to be state of the art 5-10 years ago. So we don't necessarily know what the hell he is hearing and talking about. Tradeoffs are inevitable.
I was just trying to point out (above) my philosophy on making these tradeoffs. Personally I think a combo of SS and tubes are necessary to make a "system" sound good. It's the blend of the two that does it for me.
Quote from: BobM on November 30, 2011, 09:05:25 AM
...Personally I think a combo of SS and tubes are necessary to make a "system" sound good. It's the blend of the two that does it for me.
"LESS FILLING, TASTES GREAT!" :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Quote from: BobM on November 30, 2011, 09:05:25 AM
Personally I think a combo of SS and tubes are necessary to make a "system" sound good.
And you are not alone in that philosophy even on an individual componet basis. There are very few pure tube designs being produced today, even at the top end of the price spectrum. Audio Reseach started incorporating solid state deices into their tube amps quite a few years ago under the thought that there are things that tubes do better than solid state and visa versa and they made an effort to use the best "tool for the job" at each point in a circuit design in order to get the best overall sound from the unit as a whole.
Hey Richidoo - Nice signature line! :thumb: I am truly honored! :D
Hey SN, I recognize genius when I see it! :thumb:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pjDIMP-wAfU/TchJEqRmJfI/AAAAAAAAAE8/a39kypXH98M/s400/Wile+E+Coyote.jpg)
Thanks, gentlemen! :thumb:
Quote from: BobM on November 30, 2011, 12:36:15 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pjDIMP-wAfU/TchJEqRmJfI/AAAAAAAAAE8/a39kypXH98M/s400/Wile+E+Coyote.jpg)
among us idiots! :clap: :rofl:
I like my SS equipment for many of the same reasons cited by richidoo. It's cheap to run and can be left on continuously in addition, as my system has evolved over time the window into the music has become progressively clearer and larger. Masking of low level information has been drastically lowered with the latest changes to my preamp and poweramp. This has been accomplished by using solid polymer aluminum electrolytics as coupling caps. In my system they are used as the DC blocking capacitor in the feedback loop of my power amp and phono-stage. They are also used as coupling caps on the output of my class A buffer line-stage and my USB DAC.
When these caps replaced the BlackGate and Panasonic FM caps in my system, the improvement was so dramatic that I basically had a brand new stereo system.
If these caps are applicable to your circuitry they offer an disproportionally large improvement. When their cost is factored in it's a virtual no-brainer, they average $3.00 apiece. Now that's what I call technological progress, thank-you computer industry!
Scotty
Aye Scotty dem der Blackgates are quite over rated. thanks for the heads up.
charles
SMA
rollo, be advised that this type of cap has issues with leakage current. If you have more than 5 volts of DC offset the leakage may be more than you can stand. This is the one thing that BlackGates have got over the solid polymer electrolytics, BlackGates don't have any appreciable leakage current.
My Superphon Rev 3 has about 3volts DC offset, so the solid polymer cap is a slam dunk. The power amp application is no problem at all as all you are doing is stopping the amplifier from having gain at DC by placing a cap to ground. You aren't blocking any kind of large DC voltage.
Scotty
Parts numbers Scotty, we need part numbers. Looking forward to checking them out.
Funny, we've been using Nich low leakage for coupling and PS with great results compared to BG and some films. Funny because your caps are high leakage and they sound good. So much for the theory about leakage current. Thanks for sharing
Here is the Mouser search page for Organic Solid Polymer Electrolytic capacitors.
http://www.mouser.com/Passive-Components/Capacitors/Aluminum-Organic-Polymer-Capacitors/_/N-5g7s?P=1z0z7l5
This is an entire class of electrolytic capacitors. There is not just one or two that are good they are all good.
Both Nichicon and United Chemicon caps will work and sound great. The page is for through hole parts.
I forgot to mention these are just the thing for super low impedance low voltage power supplies.
Scotty
All things being equal the broadband impedance characteristics are much more important than the amount of leakage current.
There is a manufacturer that makes an electrolytic capacitor with silk and bamboo paper in it that has almost no leakage at all it also has a completely unremarkable impedance curve and it sounds DOA as well.
The solid polymer electrolytic is a GIGO part. If you put a hashy, distorted, grainy signal into it that is what will come out the other side.
This cap will not mask an upstream problem and while it is not as good as direct coupling a circuit I think I can live with it until the next breakthrough in capacitor technology.
Another nice thing about these caps is that there is no smearing, unlike film caps which uniformly exhibit smearing of the signal. As a result of this the focus in the sound-stage is tighter and the acoustic space the recording was made in is more clearly delineated. Reverberation tails are easier to hear and can be followed further into the noise floor, backgound is blacker too.
Scotty
Thanks Scotty. I'll try them. I've seen them before, on the Buffalo DAC PCB, I think.
The same surface mount package has been used for standard electrolytic
caps you would have to confirm that by checking part numbers.
It would be nice if they did use polymer electrolytic caps in there.
Scotty
Thanks guys for carrying this topic onwards, although I did secretly hope someone would support my experience with ICE. You have however thrown a wrench into the works with this new direction about caps. I am well aware about how important they are in the scheme of things. I'm not quite sure where all the BG's are situated in my amp. There's a whole raft of them. I'm pretty sure they are the infamous ones that take forever to break in. The ICE module being atypical in it's design, the above comments may not exactly apply. When I requested this upgrade, from Wyred4sound, he asked me what I wanted, given the space limitations in the case, and the BG's where available and fit so that's where I went. IN my very modded CDP, it's Mundorf just about everywhere. I'm afraid I'm pretty ignorant...He did say however, that the Vishay Z'foils put in the amp were very special and would have a big effect. I guess at the end of the day, since I can't go back and change anything, I have to believe that what I hear is a fortuitous combination of circumstances and wishing to have done it "better" is just a sure sign of Nervosa.
shep, unfortunately audio is a moving target and what was the best today may only be good tomorrow. In my case I only have to be concerned with 8 "coupling" caps in my system. In several cases the power supply rails are too high to allow the use of polymer caps.
I wouldn't get too hung up about what is in your current components as sooner or later they will be replaced with something that sounds better.
Scotty
Scotty, you are right the same can for SMD caps. Vishay and Nichicon look like that.
shep, I am open minded to class D amps. I have had some incredible listening experiences with Nuforce and Spectron amps. But I also experienced and heard about very bad problems with each of those. I'm intrigued to hear Digital Amplifier Company Cherry, and Channel Islands D200mk2. The original D500 was the first of the mkII CIA amps and very impressive when I heard it in 2008.
I am not a big fan of anything W4S, but it seems like your tech was able to work magic that is not in their commercial offerings.
My friend Sol can talk me down from the class D tree in a heartbeat with the technical challenges that make it inappropriate for high end use. But I'm always willing to listen to a new amp and he is always open to new solutions to the problems. Usually the class D art is in how do we disguise the switching frequency, with filters and feedback. A linear amp can be made without those. So that's the challenge in a nutshell. The switching freq is never fully disguised and bat ears like half of the guys in our club leave the room when it is turned on just idling. I can't hear it, but I'd like my guests to be able to enjoy my system instead of hide outside. Bad enough they hide from my speakers! :rofl:
But I would be thrilled to own an amp that made music like Spectron does but without the technical problems. Awesome resolution, awesome bass. Sounds like that's what you're hearing with your little ICE cube too?
Maybe this is my spectron beater:
http://www.hypex.nl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89&Itemid=100
Check out the tests on the product bulletin PDF. Amazingly low distortion and noise. But how does it sound?
Quote from: shep on November 30, 2011, 10:47:56 PM
....I did secretly hope someone would support my experience with ICE.......
Shep there is no need for anyone to support your experience with ICE. A good amp is a good amp regardless of the technology used to build it. If it works in your system and inside of your head then it is a good amp for you. And that is all that should matter.
If a piece of gear gets my foot tapping then is is good for me and I could care less what is, or is not inside the box.
Buy your gear and build you system to you and you alone. If somebody else doesn't like it, tha'ts their loss. There is plenty of other gear for them to pick from to find something that will make them happy.
On the contrary...
(http://community.klipsch.com/forums/storage/4/182145/Klipsch%20Rules2.jpg)
Tubes are for tires. :)
Quote from: tmazz on December 01, 2011, 01:23:32 PM
Quote from: shep on November 30, 2011, 10:47:56 PM
....I did secretly hope someone would support my experience with ICE.......
Shep there is no need for anyone to support your experience with ICE. A good amp is a good amp regardless of the technology used to build it. If it works in your system and inside of your head then it is a good amp for you. And that is all that should matter.
I have to say that when I first heard them I didn't like what I was hearing, but the technology has improved greatly lately. I don't know that I would buy one for myself, yet, but they are getting better.
Ice is nice. The Arion Hybrid class "D" amp that is. With Analysis Speakers the Arion broought ouy the body and soul as well as all the detail and speed associated with class"D". Did not sound SS at all did not tubey at all. The best of both worlds.
Class "D" can be done right. The key is how to make music continuous with all the switching going on inside. Not an easy task. www.analysisaudio.com/arion.php
I believe it is Levenson that has a patent or patent pending on a new way of making the swithching more contiuous. Interesting stuff.
charles
SMA
I am more than willing to believe that whatever "magic" was wrought it somehow masked the problems others have described. If it were just my ears I would say "ok" I'm hearing what I want to hear, but since a tube guy hears the same...something right is going on. Thanks for all your opinions.
Good memory rollo. Yes, the flagship Levinson amp is No. 53. $40k/pair.
http://www.marklevinson.com/Products/Details/22
It is a class D switching amplifier, but like Tripath did with class T, ML made up their own marketing name for it, called class I, standing for "Interleved Power."
http://www.marklevinson.com/downloads/products/prod_22_634473655136955941_ML%20No53%20Technology%20Background%20V5%2004032010_5.17.10.pdf
The innovation is that it allows the opposing polarity output devices to overlap in the conducting state. Most PP amps must turn off one output device for a microsecond before the opposite device turns on. This new design allows both positive and negative output devices to conduct simultaneously for a short time without blowing up. It is supposed to smooth out the crossover distortion.
I've heard it on a few occasions with Harman's top speakers, Revel Salon2 and JBL Everest. On both speakers it has violently aggressive transient response. Death grip would be an understatement. The speakers sound like they are afraid of the lightning bolt up their woofer port. The amp might look perfect on the bench with infinite power and infinitely low impedance, but it was unlistenable to me on those two revealing speakers, even on easy listening compressed classic rock, the tone is affected too. The No 532 linear amp sounded much better for music listening on the Salon2 and it's half the price. Listening to the 53 through Everest playing the shootout scene from "Open Range" was too frightening to enjoy, like being on a amusement ride that is beating the shit out of me, or like a ride in a C5 Corvette through a time trial course in a parking lot. There is only so much a human can take, and this amp has much more in reserve. Some people have the adrenals to handle that kind of fear and will pay dearly for it. I'm more of a Benji guy.
But the No 532 is an amp that I would buy in a heartbeat if I had a system that could make good use of it.
shep I think that masking problems is never the secret to better sound. In my experience it is always the removing of distortion that makes things sound better. It could be that the ICE output stage is fantastic and just waiting for a major manufacturer to reveal it through a input stage that is worthy. Your persistence with that amp finally paid off!
Hey Shep
I really thought you started up a pretty good thread here. Don't be discouraged if things didn't quite go in the direction you were looking for. It certainly won't be the last time a topic goes off on a tangent a bit, whether it's here or on any other forum for that matter.
I say "keep on postin'!!!" :thumb:
Absolutely. If it's working for you, then it's working! :thumb:
Personally, I have been both routes so many times it's not even funny. I always keep coming back to a tube preamp and a bipolar, sand amp heavily biased into Class A.
Bryan
Rich, sounds like the Levenson 53 is just another example of why you cannot pre-judge a piece of gear based on its price, high, low, good or bad.
I am going to play devils advocate here in regards to the ML No.53. What if the amp is more or less a GIGO device. If anything goes in with something wrong with it, it is just going to get louder and more aggravating to listen to when it comes back out. Yeah that's going to be fun.
Both the Revel Salon II and the JBL Everest have 24db/oct crossovers and higher order networks can ring under some operating conditions. I suspect the ML No. 53 can probably hit a loudspeaker hard enough to make both drivers and crossovers ring. Also the Revels aluminum cones could be excited enough that the out of band resonance the drivers have at the cone break-up frequency could be
generating a good dose 3rd harmonic distortion which occurs within the drivers passband even though the resonance lies outside upper cut-off frequency.
In any case neither of these speakers would be my first choice for pairing with this amplifier. The other possibility I already mentioned is an existing problem upstream of the amp being passed straight through the amp and into unforgiving speakers.
The amplifiers might only be the messenger bearing bad tidings.
On the issue of "tone", I don't know what an accurate reproduction of "tone" sounds like when the term is applied to reproducing recorded music. It's always so altered by the recording process;(ie. microphone colorations, the A to D converter, manipulations by the digital mixing console, which could be state of the art or sound like crap, etc,etc,etc.) that I don't know what right might be in regards to a particular recording.
I have heard some switching amplifiers that sound harmonically thinner than their Class A or Class AB counterparts and I prefer the sound of the conventional amps when I encounter this problem with a switching amp. But this is still a case of my making a value judgment, in absolute terms I may be full crap and have only chosen what I like to listen to.
I think a closer listen to the ML No.53 under controlled conditions, say in ones own system, might yield a more definitive answer as to whether the emperors' new clothes are really there or not.
Scotty
For years tubes and solid state have gotten closer, first at extreme costs but eventually at more attainable prices. However I still hear image/tone density with tubes versus bass control with solid state.
I'm pretty much a solid state purist for the reasons mentioned above but also for the sake of consistancy (it drives me crazy knowing that the sound of tubes change over time).
I am currently using digital amplification (Channel Island Audio D-100 monoblocks, the original). Modded Hypex circuit with huge power supply.
But IMO synergy with the speakers can't be ignored. Bass can sound weak with solid state or flabby with tubes. Syrupy sound with tubes or slightly warm with solid state. In the end, as SN stated, whatever floats your boat.