View Full Version : Who will win?
Just a bit of fun here...
Ali Tait is coming round tomorrow with some amps to try with the Yammie 1000M's. Lets see if we can predict which is going to be the best match! :)
Vote people, vote I tell ya!
Spectral Morn
04-12-2009, 18:50
Just a bit of fun among ourselves here...
Ali is coming round tomorrow with some amps to try with the Yammies. Lets see if we can predict which is going to be the best match! :)
We are good Mike, but not that good.
What amplifiers are coming to your house tomorrow ? List please.
Regards D S D L
See the poll numpty! :lol:
Spectral Morn
04-12-2009, 18:53
See the poll numpty! :lol:
:doh: Yep My page didn't load in such a way that I saw there was anything at the top of the page.
You should have said "See Vote above":ner::ner::ner::ner::lol::lol::lol:
Anyway the MF amp is a possibility as I have heard MF with NS1000's and it was IMHO a good match..worked well.
Regards Neil
So make a choice and vote! :rolleyes:
anthonyTD
04-12-2009, 18:56
tis done sire!:eyebrows:
A...
Dave Cawley
04-12-2009, 19:08
None, you need something better and more suitable?:christmas:
Dave
I've only really heard the Wad 300b PP (about 5 different flavours) so can only take a guess regarding the poll, its a nice amp, not bad for a valve job:lolsign:
None, you need something better and more suitable?:christmas:
Dave
Dave, the poll is just a bit of fun in trying to guess which out of the three will match best. :)
Ali Tait
04-12-2009, 19:47
Not bad for a valve job!!?? Eee ye cheeky monkey! :lolsign:
Akcherly Mike,having listened to both amps tonight,the Audioromy cuts it on my system.Not often an SE betters a PP into a more difficult load.On the other hand,I've read that the Yammies like a bit of power,so maybe the A370 will win the day! I think you're gonna be shocked by this Chinese contraption though...
The A370 is a great amp,but to my ears with my system,it doesn't quite get there compared to the 813.Strange when you always read that statics respond well to a bit of power.Just goes to show,you need to try it yourself. Roll on tomorrow!
Ali Tait
04-12-2009, 19:48
Haha just looked at the poll.I think you're all wrong! We'll see tomorrow... watch this space.
It'll be interesting to see what happens.
You'd think the 12" bass driver would need the SS or PP amp to get hold of 'em, but then again, they're lightweight paper cones in a sealed box, so not too 'boomy' (unlike the bloody room!). The Yams are also quite sensitive (especially for that era) and are supposed to be pretty valve friendly! Maybe a gutsy SE is just what they need? Or do they need the current after all?
Who knows?... It's all 'up in the air'! :eyebrows:
Oi!... which of you buggers think they're gonna blow up!?! :stalks:
Cheeky feckers! :lol:
Bah!... I've got a Chicken to marinade! <wanders off in a strop>
It's not the power, it's the balance. ;)
Ali Tait
04-12-2009, 20:37
Well it might blow up Mike! The Audioromy did the other night... Buuut,a change of underpants and some fettling later,it's fine!:)
From what I've read,yes,the Yammies are sensitive,but do they not have a bit of an unfriendly impedance curve?
bonneville
04-12-2009, 20:49
300 B for me !
Vinnie:)
themystical
04-12-2009, 20:51
I think you are right Ali and its gonna be the Audioromy!!!!
Fingers crossed the majority are wrong! :lol:
Well it might blow up Mike! The Audioromy did the other night... Buuut,a change of underpants and some fettling later,it's fine!:)
From what I've read,yes,the Yammies are sensitive,but do they not have a bit of an unfriendly impedance curve?
A bit like this mate...
I've seen worse! ;)
http://www.thevintageknob.org/YAMAHA/NS1000/NS1000-plot5
anthonyTD
04-12-2009, 20:58
thats not bad at all mike!:)
infact if i had seen the graphs before hand i may have been persuaded to vote otherwise, but for now i will stick to my original choice,,, 300B pp.
A...
To get the best out of those Yams you need lots of power with lots of control
Well HERE'S (http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/oldeworldehtml/yamahans1000m.html) a bit about the Yam's... As far as I know, all three amps a class A jobs. ;)
Stratmangler
04-12-2009, 21:53
Well I voted Audioromy myself, but that's just because of the rumours of the Yams being amp killers.:eyebrows:
Chris;)
Ali Tait
04-12-2009, 21:53
Yes,guess what I've read isn't right,looks pretty good Mike.Still going for the 813 though! Avinash knows...
I listened to them once with a CA-1000 amp. Hard to forget. :)
They are very revealing (they are close monitors, if I recall properly), and, as John says, they are very sensitive to amp control.
I do admire you guys who are significantly influenced by squiggles! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Yikes!... replacing the crossover caps for nice fresh new ones might cost a few bob! :uhho:
http://i.ebayimg.com/02/!BgcoU0wB2k~$(KGrHqEH-EEEsL(4sNOvBLFWcuKbsg~~_12.JPG
Stratmangler
04-12-2009, 22:13
I do admire you guys who are significantly influenced by squiggles! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Squiggle responses usually confirm hard bitten experience.
Chris:ner:
By the look of the poll results so far... There's not a lot of faith in these speakers staying in one piece!!! :lolsign:
Stratmangler
04-12-2009, 22:18
By the look of the poll results so far... There's not a lot of faith in these speakers staying in one piece!!! :lolsign:
I reckon that the speakers will come through it all in tact. The amps on the other hand.......
Chris;)
Ali Tait
04-12-2009, 22:36
If they've driven the statics all this time,they should be fine! The audioromy in particular has had a lot of use in the last two years.Mostly been on at least 5 hours a day.Every day.
I do admire you guys who are significantly influenced by squiggles! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Ooh, hark at you! <raises handbag to chest>
Well, s'cuse those of us wots understands wots theys means! :ner:
The Grand Wazoo
04-12-2009, 23:52
I voted for the MF - the only reason being that if I know a tiny bit about Yamaha amps of that vintage, I'd say they'd have gone for flexure over finesse when they were designing them.
Don't know the speakers other than by reputation
Lets see if we can predict which is going to be the best match!
Depends what music you feed them with and at what sound levels. If it's acoustic folk/Jazz etc then the WAD, But if it's Beethoven's 9th or AC~DC then the MF.
Stratmangler
05-12-2009, 00:20
Ali's point about the 'statics is very telling - the 'stats he's talking about have a truly wicked impedance in the HF.
Chris;)
Depends what music you feed them with and at what sound levels. If it's acoustic folk/Jazz etc then the WAD, But if it's Beethoven's 9th or AC~DC then the MF.
Let's see... <thumbs through LP's> ...there's no Jazz, but quite a lot of acoustic Folky stuff. And quite a lot of ACDC! :hmm:
Ali's point about the 'statics is very telling - the 'stats he's talking about have a truly wicked impedance in the HF.
Chris;)
Many do! :eyebrows:
Hmmm... talking of Ali's 'statics, that gives me an idea. I wonder if Colin would be up for veneering the Yammies? Now there's a thought! :eek:
Stratmangler
05-12-2009, 00:34
Hmmm... talking of Ali's 'statics, that gives me an idea. I wonder if Colin would be up for veneering the Yammies? Now there's a thought! :eek:
You can but ask !
And you know that the result would be superbly executed.
Chris;)
Stratmangler
05-12-2009, 00:37
The novelty of red worn off ?
Chris;)
TBH, it never really caught on! :lol:
I've only met Colin once, and very briefly, when his foot was in plaster. Seen his handiwork though... very nice stuff! :)
Stratmangler
05-12-2009, 00:47
Have you got Colin's contact details ?
Chris:)
Not directly... but I know his user-name, err, 'elsewhere'. Can't say too much here or some big haggis muncher who's after getting his mouldy old Lockwoods veneered might try and jump the que. Can't have that! ;)
jandl100
05-12-2009, 06:59
Hmm .. interesting. I think it will be dependent on which music you use as a reference - single-ended will sound best for small scale music, but there's no getting away from the serious grunt and control to be had from that big MF mutha on larger scale stuff!
I've voted for the p-p WAD amp, though, as being the best compromise. :)
I've had Yammie 1000M's and used them with a few amps - I reckon that to get the best sound you need to change the speakers! :lolsign:
Not directly... but I know his user-name, err, 'elsewhere'. Can't say too much here or some big haggis muncher who's after getting his mouldy old Lockwoods veneered might try and jump the que. Can't have that! ;)
Hahaha... I'm not in a hurry, Geordie-girl... That one's 'pencilled in' for spring next year :eyebrows:
I've got Colin's email address. Ya wants me to fling it in a PM? :)
Marco.
Primalsea
05-12-2009, 10:21
He leg wan'nt in plaster because he dropped someone's half veneered speaker on it was it?
I think it will be the amp that you least expect to be most suitable, not that I'm sitting on the fence or anything.
The existing crossover caps are/were top quality self-healing ones and I'd leave well alone if I were you....
I voted MF, purely 'cos of the power on offer. The NS1000's are very over-damped by comparison with other porty boxes and they'll need the watts to really come alive, despite the measured sensitivity being good.
Marco, I LOVE squiggles, don't you?????? :D
For "flattest" response, tradition has it that the NS1000's are run with the mid control set to 10 o'clock and the tweeter at 11 o'clock. That's how I ran mine and they were fine enough.
Trouble was, the Epos ES14's that replaced the Yammies at home were better in every way except perhaps the bass, and this was almost sorted with putting the port-bungs in sideways. The ES14 LOVE valve equipment as well.............................................. ......
Primalsea
05-12-2009, 18:42
My mate has Epos ES14's (the original version) and loves them. He even bought a spare pair and stored them away. I have to admit there is not much that comes close to them either. Last time I heard them he was triamping with 3 of those small Yarland EL34 amps. In a word lovely!
Primalsea
05-12-2009, 18:46
Nope!! I recalled wrong they are the original M22 floor standers! Never hear the ES14,:doh::doh:
jandl100
05-12-2009, 19:12
Staying off topic :) - I had Epos ES30 for quite a while - damn good speakers actually! Although these floorstanders were even better when mounted on short stands.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii114/jandl100/EPOSES302-1.jpg
They really loved being close to the wall.
aquapiranha
06-12-2009, 00:00
I have voted, though to predict another's personal preference would be quite a feat!
Ali Tait
06-12-2009, 15:42
And the winner is........
The WAD 300b PP!
Thanks to Mike and family for the good beer,good company and great curry!
First up was the WAD.Mike's system had not been on for weeks,so needed some serious warming up.Initial impressions were-good,but not great.Got better as things warmed up.Next up was the MF.Sounded good but curiously had the weakest bass of the three.Finally,the 813.This had the best bass of the three,and sounded great,but lacked the refinement of the 300b.I don't get this at home,but the Yammies being easier to drive than the statics showed this up.The 300b suffers by comparison to the 813 in my system.Just not enough power I think.What we did agree on was that the 813 has loads of potential,and with parts of equivalent quality to the WAD,would probably better it.After a good listen to all three,later on we went back to the WAD.By now,everything had warmed up properly,and the WAD sounded nothing short of stunning through the Yammies! A real case of system synergy methinks. We had gone over to vinyl,and Mike's deck and phono stage were sounding superb.You'd have to spend serious wonga to better it! I note Mike hasn't posted yet,he must be too busy being enthralled by his new amp!
My headache hasn't gone yet! :nocomment:
Umm, interesting. I was half right then :eyebrows: I've rarely heard anything bad about WAD. I'm a bit taken aback that the MF had the weakest bass :scratch:
Out of Interest, what music did you play?
do i get a prize then for getting it right?;)
Nice one! Sounds like you chaps had a good time... :gig:
I'll look forward to hearing some of this kit at Scalford Hall! ;)
Marco.
Spectral Morn
06-12-2009, 17:28
Umm, interesting. I was half right then :eyebrows: I've rarely heard anything bad about WAD. I'm a bit taken aback that the MF had the weakest bass :scratch:
Out of Interest, what music did you play?
Me too. When I heard MF with NS1000s the bass was stunning. Go figure....? Different system, room etc.
Regards D S D L
Ali Tait
06-12-2009, 17:41
We played all sorts of stuff,both vinyl and cd,and it was always the same.Maybe it needs recapped.
Spectral Morn
06-12-2009, 17:48
We played all sorts of stuff,both vinyl and cd,and it was always the same.Maybe it needs recapped.
Maybe, it is well over 20 years old, and those old MF designs were particularly hard on components, being class A.
Regards D S D L
The Grand Wazoo
06-12-2009, 18:44
I've heard several of those amps in different systems & bass is the one thing I'd never expect it to be seen off over - esp. by 300B's - push/pull or not.
Ali Tait
06-12-2009, 19:25
There wasn't a lot in it between the MF and the WAD,but the 813 had far more bass.
jandl100
06-12-2009, 19:42
There wasn't a lot in it between the MF and the WAD,but the 813 had far more bass.
Interesting.
What was the placement of the Yams relative to the wall? They really need to be quite close up to get a balanced bass, ime - if they were more than a foot or so from the wall then a surplus of bass from the amp would lead to a better overall performance, I suspect.
Dave Cawley
06-12-2009, 20:23
Hang on chaps, so there was no modern transistor amp at all? Just a clapped out MF, this isn't fair at all! :doh:
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
Dave
ooohhh, can we all come and watch!! :popcorn:
anthonyTD
06-12-2009, 20:31
Hang on chaps, so there was no modern transistor amp at all? Just a clapped out MF, this isn't fair at all! :doh:
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
Dave
dave,
this little experiment wasnt about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction, it was about over-all sonic performance, i think the fact that both mike and ali came to the same conclusion means a lot!
A...
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
Hi Dave,
I'm askin'!
{Gauntlet accepted} Bring it on, baby! :)
Let's do it then at Scalford Hall. Can you drag yourself away from the deepest south for a change? Mike's bringing his Yammies there...
Leaving aside the amps that Mike and Ali heard, which I don't really know very well (although I'm sure are very good), I'll make a bet with you.
Bring your "killer silicon amp" to Scalford Hall and if my Copper amp (or Steve's) doesn't blow it into the weeds with either Mike's NS1000s or my Tannoys, I'll give you £100 - I promise!!
If the opposite happens, of course, then you give me £100. We could even donate it to the Cat Protection League if you wanted...
Are you a man or a mouse? :eyebrows:
Marco.
Ali Tait
06-12-2009, 21:05
"Clapped out" is a bit harsh I think.The amp sounds very good and does not lack for bass on my statics.We werem't looking for the loudest amp,just the best sounding,and on the Yammies,the WAD was streets ahead of the other two.
A bit of 'Dirty Vegas' played rather loudly through them is a great hangover cure too! :eek:
Need to have a look at that hum/buzz issue though, it's much worse with my simple little passive attenuator. :scratch:
Steve Toy
06-12-2009, 21:56
dave,
this little experiment wasnt about drving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction,
:laugh:
Dave Cawley
06-12-2009, 22:45
this little experiment wasnt about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction
How patronising, I think this says it all!!!!!:rolleyes:
Dave
Not patronising, surely just factual? :scratch:
Dave, what about my bet, mate? You did throw down the gauntlet!!
Or do you turn orange once outside the environs of Dartmouth? ;)
Marco.
Dave Cawley
06-12-2009, 22:58
this little experiment wasnt about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction
This isn't factual at all, where is the fact? It was patronising, if you can't see that, then you will just have to accept my word. I have to say Anthony's and Steve's rudeness do not sit well with me. You expect me to take rudeness and participate? no way.............
Dave
anthonyTD
06-12-2009, 22:58
this little experiment wasnt about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction
How patronising, I think this says it all!!!!!:rolleyes:
Dave
:scratch::confused:
Hi Dave,
This isn't factual at all, where is the fact? It was patronising, if you can't see that, then you will just have to accept my word.
Fair enough. Sorry, but I didn't see it as in any way patronising.
I have to say Anthony's and Steve's rudeness do not sit well with me. You expect me to take rudeness and participate? no way.............
Now here I most vehemently disagree! In no way whatsoever was Anthony rude - he doesn't do rude... Steve was just having a harmless giggle.
Come on, stop being a big girl, let's hear this killer silicon amp of yours. What is it, anyway? :)
Marco.
anthonyTD
06-12-2009, 23:08
this little experiment wasnt about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction
This isn't factual at all, where is the fact? It was patronising, if you can't see that, then you will just have to accept my word. I have to say Anthony's and Steve's rudeness do not sit well with me. You expect me to take rudeness and participate? no way.............
Dave
dave,
i have no idea what it is that you think is patronising about me stating a fact, and that was, the experiment was just about the three amps listed at the top of the original thread that mike started, whether you think the MF amp was knackered [ a bit insulting to say the least] or broken is irelivent, it was still only about those three amps!!! i suspect there are many people here who could have supplied amplifiers that may have driven mikes speakers better in a diffrent way but they werent in the equation.
i hope i have made my point clear.
A...
Indeed. I'm trying to remain neutral here, but IMO:
Hang on chaps, so there was no modern transistor amp at all? Just a clapped out MF, this isn't fair at all!
...Is rather more "rude" than anything Anthony or Steve has said, simply because you've no idea how that particular amp sounds, therefore to refer to it as "clapped out" was rather rude. Modern in hi-fi doesn't necessarily mean better; often quite the opposite in my experience!
You do have a rather 'unusual' way of looking at things sometimes, Dave :scratch:
Marco.
Hang on chaps, so there was no modern transistor amp at all? Just a clapped out MF, this isn't fair at all! :doh:
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
Dave
Well, it wasn't a competition or magazine review, or anything at all 'serious' in any way.... Just a bit of fun with some of Ali's amps, and a good excuse for some beer 'n curry! :)
The MF didn't in any way sound 'clapped out', it just didn't gel quite as happily with the Yams in the way the two valve amps did. No big deal...
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 08:57
It wasn't me who originally said the MF was clapped out it was from here:
We played all sorts of stuff,both vinyl and cd,and it was always the same. Maybe it needs recapped.
Maybe, it is well over 20 years old, and those old MF designs were particularly hard on components, being class A.
Anthony knows only too well what he meant by "this little experiment wasn't about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction" and at best it is patronising.
I should know not to engage with Moderators, sorry! I'll continue this thread, without challenging any moderators in the next post.
Dave
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 09:26
The NS1000M's are very unusual in that they have no port and are completely sealed. Hence they need to be driven very well.
David Price used for a long time a pair of NuForce Ref 9SE's, although Class D they sounded very good, why? Well the 9SE's have a very high damping factor and can control loudspeakers very well indeed.
My challenge would have been to use a modern, high damping factor, Class AB solid state amplifier.
Valve amps usually have a low damping factor, and I believe the MF does too, so the results were maybe not what people expected. I could go so far as to say that all the amplifiers used may not have been suitable for the NS1000M's? Maybe some big 854 valves, or even bigger? And certainly a more modern solid state amplifier, round two?
Regards
Dave
Hi Dave,
It wasn't me who originally said the MF was clapped out it was from here:
We played all sorts of stuff,both vinyl and cd,and it was always the same. Maybe it needs recapped.
Maybe, it is well over 20 years old, and those old MF designs were particularly hard on components, being class A.
Yes, but that doesn't mean to say it was "clapped out" (your words; no-one elses), and indeed Mike (who was there and heard the amp) has just said:
The MF didn't in any way sound 'clapped out', it just didn't gel quite as happily with the Yams in the way the two valve amps did. No big deal...
Therefore, mate, no disrespect, but I'm inclined to believe the views of the people who were there and actually heard the amp in question! ;)
Anthony knows only too well what he meant by "this little experiment wasn't about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction" and at best it is patronising.
Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one because I didn't read that as being patronising. I think you're reading him wrongly, but I'm sure that Anthony will confirm either way :)
The thing is, and what you're forgetting, is that this exercise wasn't about a 'valve vs. ss shootout' (which is how you seem to be taking it), it was two mates having a bake-off with a few of their amps, that's all, so I've no idea what prompted the initial remark you made, as if somehow you felt that you had to 'defend' silicon amps.... :scratch:
I should know not to engage with Moderators, sorry! I'll continue this thread, without challenging any moderators in the next post.
Please don't start that nonsense again :rolleyes:
You can challenge whoever you like as often as you like; just don't expect to get things all your own way, that's all. You can't challenge people and then moan when you don't like the responses!
My challenge would have been to use a modern, high damping factor, Class AB solid state amplifier.
Exactly which amp is it? I did ask before.
Now, I'd appreciate an answer to this please - no more avoiding the issue:
Valve amps usually have a low damping factor, and I believe the MF does too, so the results were maybe not what people expected. I could go so far as to say that all the amplifiers used may not have been suitable for the NS1000M's? Maybe some big 854 valves, or even bigger? And certainly a more modern solid state amplifier, round two?
Theories are fine, but let's find out shall we? I suspect that 4 x KT88s in P/P mode producing 30W of pure Class A will be more than 'sufficient'... So... Are you going to accept my amp challenge at Scalford Hall or not??
I'm definitely hearing some mouse squeaks here, so far! :eyebrows: ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 10:57
It wasn't me who originally said the MF was clapped out it was from here:
We played all sorts of stuff,both vinyl and cd,and it was always the same. Maybe it needs recapped.
Maybe, it is well over 20 years old, and those old MF designs were particularly hard on components, being class A.
Anthony knows only too well what he meant by "this little experiment wasn't about driving a pair of loudspeakers forcefully till destruction" and at best it is patronising.
I should know not to engage with Moderators, sorry! I'll continue this thread, without challenging any moderators in the next post.
Dave
now who's being patronising!!!:rolleyes:
dave, as far an amp being better on damping factor figures alone, if that were true there would be no one using valve amps full stop, fortunetly its not, and thankfully there are many other aspects to take into acount of why one amplifier regardless of its components [valve, mosfet, transistor etc] will work better with a paticular loudspeaker than another, infact one of the reasons why some solid state amps sound un-musical and dead is because the damping factor is too high! i am not going into this here but feedback is one of the main fix's to gain said high damping factor figures and low distortion in solid state and valve amps, which for most people is not a good thing when it comes to over-all listening pleasure.
dave, from what i can tell by your opinions on this subject you like to test things and judge a piece of equipment by its test merits,now dont get me wrong, this is a good starting point, but i make/build equipment, i test equipment, then i listen to said equipment and make my mind up about its sonic abilities regardless of anything else!
if you think that i have been out of line in anything i have said in response to your coments in this thread then i appologise, but i cant for the life of me understand what that was, its a discusion,:scratch:and therefore i will continue with my usual way of discussing things here.
regards,anthony,TD...
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 11:27
you like to test things and judge a piece of equipment by its test merits
And this is why I was the first person to comment at the MAD weekend about the speaker/amplifier mismatch? By using my ears alone??? Anthony, please do not consider me to be a competitor to you, I'm not. And please do not put words into my mouth as you have done above.
Anthony, I feel you and Marco are not really addressing the NS1000M issue, it's not about valves, it's about speakers?
I'm surprised Marco did not comment to my post 83, but never mind. And to you Marco: Your challenge; is all about your valve amplifier and your Tannoy's, and we all know you have the best amplifier in the world, and the best speakers in the world, so anyone would be plain silly to take you on! My gauntlet was all about amplifiers to drive NS1000M's and that is still on.
I'm growing tired of this now and the spontaneity has all gone.
Dave
twelvebears
07-12-2009, 11:46
Hang on chaps, so there was no modern transistor amp at all? Just a clapped out MF, this isn't fair at all! :doh:
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
Dave
Should have offered my M3.....
Hi Dave,
Anthony, I feel you and Marco are not really addressing the NS1000M issue, it's not about valves, it's about speakers?
No - it's about a bake-off between two friends with their amps and some NS1000s, not some valve vs. SS debate, which for some reason you've seen fit to turn it into! ;)
I'm surprised Marco did not comment to my post 83, but never mind.
I did. I asked you what killer silicon amp you had in mind to bring - a question which you keep avoiding. The rest (to me) was largely irrelevant, as I couldn't give a monkey's what amps David has used with his NS1000s; his views, whilst worthy of respect, are not definitive.
My challenge involves using an amp whose capabilities I know inside out, which leads me to suspect (I don't know yet, but I'm willing to find out) that it would perform better with NS1000s than any silicon amp you care to put forward. I'd like to test this theory in a real-world situation.
You, however, are skirting round the issue for reasons best known to you....
And to you Marco: Your challenge; is all about your valve amplifier and your Tannoy's, and we all know you have the best amplifier in the world, and the best speakers in the world, so anyone would be plain silly to take you on!
Nonsense. Mike's NS1000s will be there, so it's the perfect occasion to bring your killer silicon amp and test your theory.
And also, now who's been patronising! For someone who takes exception to this, you're doing a good job of demonstrating it to all and sundry!! :eyebrows:
The above you've written I'd suggest is translated as:
"And to you Marco: I'm chickening out of coming to Scalford Hall because there's a chance I'll lose and so look a bit silly, plus I only go to such events when it's worth my while and within an acceptable distance from where I live."
Come on, admit it! :lol: ;)
My gauntlet was all about amplifiers to drive NS1000M's and that is still on.
If it's "still on", then where and when is the test going to be carried out??
Marco.
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 12:00
Marco, as usual you are not reading my posts, or the original one. Both you and Anthony are putting words into my mouth.
I trust my ears, and I trust David Price's ears. As you have dismissed us both, what point is there in continuing this.
Is this fun, no! So don't expect me to play! (or to answer your next posts)
Dave
Marco, as usual you are not reading my posts, or the original one.
Perhaps because you have the tendency to write in riddles, or at best, rarely say what you actually mean? Incidentally, I'm not the only one who thinks this.
Dave, you're in a wee world of your own, mate... Let's leave it at that ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 12:32
you like to test things and judge a piece of equipment by its test merits
And this is why I was the first person to comment at the MAD weekend about the speaker/amplifier mismatch? By using my ears alone??? Anthony, please do not consider me to be a competitor to you, I'm not. And please do not put words into my mouth as you have done above.
Anthony, I feel you and Marco are not really addressing the NS1000M issue, it's not about valves, it's about speakers?
I'm surprised Marco did not comment to my post 83, but never mind. And to you Marco: Your challenge; is all about your valve amplifier and your Tannoy's, and we all know you have the best amplifier in the world, and the best speakers in the world, so anyone would be plain silly to take you on! My gauntlet was all about amplifiers to drive NS1000M's and that is still on.
I'm growing tired of this now and the spontaneity has all gone.
Dave
dave,
first of all,,,i have no issues with you as far as competition is concerned, why would i,:scratch: you dont build anything or produce any product that is of your own design as far as i know, [please correct me if i am wrong on this] when you do this puts you at the complete mercy of the genral public, some people cant handle that hence the next best thing to them is to openly analyse and critise anyone one who dares to put their neck on the line as far as creating a product or a following! so as far as i am concerned your comments of any competition issues are well off! this is all about your coments on what was initialy a friendly bit of fun between two members of this forum concerning the equipment they had at hand at the time.
also as far as your comments are concerned on the yamaha ns1000's if they are infinite baffle [sealed units] then they are already pretty well damped, and that is probably why they respond favourably to amplifiers that dont tend to have a necesarily high damping factor!
lastly, dont use the excuse of not being able to chalenge certain people here because of their position, that will only be seen as a low blow.
A...
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 14:21
OK, back to normality!! A lot of what is on my SL-1200 page is my own design, I am MD of Timestep, and 50% of the hardware on www.time-step.com is my design too, it is used by the Worlds Navy and governments, as well as guys in the street.
I believe because the NS1000's are a sealed box, and inherently damped in themselves, that you actually need a very powerful amplifier to drive them, and a high damping factor. Think about it, and let's discuss this? It's different damping factors, one mechanical, and one electrical. Look at it this way, to move a car with its brakes on (highly damped) you need a lot of power (high damping factor)?
Dave
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 14:41
OK, back to normality!! A lot of what is on my SL-1200 page is my own design, I am MD of Timestep, and 50% of the hardware on www.time-step.com is my design too, it is used by the Worlds Navy and governments, as well as guys in the street.
I believe because the NS1000's are a sealed box, and inherently damped in themselves, that you actually need a very powerful amplifier to drive them, and a high damping factor. Think about it, and let's discuss this? It's different damping factors, one mechanical, and one electrical. Look at it this way, to move a car with its brakes on (highly damped) you need a lot of power (high damping factor)?
Dave
ok, now lets look at their electrical efficiency, that is how much energy is needed to produce a certain sound pressure level! something i feel your not taking into acount here.
A...
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 14:46
No, I'm talking about damping and sound quality, not volume. Do you think my car analogy is correct? And in any case the need for an amplifier driving sealed boxes to have a high damping factor?
Dave
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 14:51
No, I'm talking about damping and sound quality, not volume. Do you think my car analogy is correct? And in any case the need for an amplifier driving sealed boxes to have a high damping factor?
Dave
it is all reletive as your talking about how much energy it takes to move an object, in this case that being the speaker cone, the damping factor relates to how well the cone will stop moving under its own weight or mass as far as the speakers own damping factor is concerned.
A...
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 15:10
Yes I know that, hence my question to you about amplifier damping and the NS1000M's
Dave
Jeezuz, why can't we just listen to the buggers with your "killer silicon amp" and other amps that have been mentioned here, and see what happens, instead of all this yawn-inducing theorising? :rolleyes:
Theories mean feck all; the proof of the pudding is in the listening!!
Dave's a chicken though, so he'd rather waste all day here arguing with Anthony than actually doing the test that really matters ;)
Can you hear that 'buck buck buck-up' noise, everyone? :lol: :lol:
Marco.
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 15:24
Marco
You are being exceptionally rude, why? And why won't you let Anthony back up his views?
I would like you to retract your comments by editing them out please. You would not allow any non-moderator to say such things to another member.
Dave
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 15:27
I'm really missing something here. Why would a loudspeaker system that is already highly damped require an amplifier with a high damping factor...??? The breaking effect on the bass cone would already be present from the air sealed inside the box.
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 15:28
I'm really missing something here. Why would a loudspeaker system that is already highly damped require an amplifier with a high damping factor...???
My question too!
Dave
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 15:30
Allelujah...!!! Not just me then...!
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 15:34
No, we are waiting for an answer from Anthony.
Dave
Steve Toy
07-12-2009, 15:35
Deflection by Dave there. Let's hear the killer silicon amp at Scalford. It will be fun for all on the day, even you Dave.
Marco needs to retract nothing!
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 15:38
I'm really missing something here. Why would a loudspeaker system that is already highly damped require an amplifier with a high damping factor...??? The breaking effect on the bass cone would already be present from the air sealed inside the box.
exactly!:)
A...
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 15:41
Hmmm...:scratch:
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 15:43
Yes I know that, hence my question to you about amplifier damping and the NS1000M's
Dave
hi dave,
not sure what it is you are actualy waiting for me to explain, the previous post puts things into perspective as far as your arguement is concerned about a highly damped speaker needing an amp with an equaly or higher damping factor to control it sufficiently to reproduce music properly.
what else is there that i can add!
A...
Hi Dave,
I'm not being rude at all, just yanking yer chain! :lol:
Answer one question please:
Why won't you come to Scalford Hall and do the test?
This is the question we all want to know an answer to, so please don't avoid it again :)
Marco.
Dave Cawley
07-12-2009, 15:50
Hi Anthony, are you agreeing with me? and the car analogy? before you said that a valve amp with low damping would be better? I thought you and I discussing this would help members understand. But I sense you do not want to discus anything with me, only tell me what you think? I remember this before on two other occasions, I should have remembered and acted accordingly, opps!
So I'll not pursue it any further, it's wasting members time.
Dave
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 16:02
Hi Anthony, are you agreeing with me? and the car analogy? before you said that a valve amp with low damping would be better? I thought you and I discussing this would help members understand. But I sense you do not want to discus anything with me, only tell me what you think? I remember this before on two other occasions, I should have remembered and acted accordingly, opps!
So I'll not pursue it any further, it's wasting members time.
Dave
dave,
what are you asking me to explain or discuss, if your asking me if i agree with your car anology well,,, no not realy...
and further more i did not say anything about a valve amp having a low damping factor being better!
A...
Gents, I'm steering clear of this rather silly argument, but I have questions.
Dave... You mention using "powerful amps" with the Yams. Just how much power do you mean? I have a 'concern'!
Please note, the NS-1000's are rated for power handling at 50W continuous and 100W peak! I'd really rather not be sitting at Scalford Hall picking bits of beryllium dome out of my face! If that's OK with everyone else?... I'm not bringing them along to be destruction tested!
Does anyone know what the damping factor of these speakers actually is, or is this all just speculation? :scratch:
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 16:07
Hi Anthony, are you agreeing with me? and the car analogy? before you said that a valve amp with low damping would be better?
I thought you and I discussing this would help members understand. But I sense you do not want to discus anything with me, only tell me what you think? I remember this before on two other occasions, I should have remembered and acted accordingly, opps!
So I'll not pursue it any further, it's wasting members time.
Dave
well, thats just going to look like a cop out on your part i am afraid.!
A...
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 16:10
I could well be wrong but... my personal view is that a highly damped speaker system can be used with any amplifier type whereas a low damped speaker system would benefit from a high damping factor amp. I do understand though that this is still not critical.
I could well be wrong but... my personal view is that a highly damped speaker system can be used with any amplifier type whereas a low damped speaker system would benefit from a high damping factor amp. I do understand though that this is still not critical.
That's how I understand it too... :)
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 16:13
I could well be wrong but... my personal view is that a highly damped speaker system can be used with any amplifier type whereas a low damped speaker system would benefit from a high damping factor amp. I do understand though that this is still not critical.
my point exactly,:)
tell dave this,,, he's the one who seems to think diffrently!
A...
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 16:18
I don't think it's quite that simple though. A loudspeaker system with a large bass cone is better damped than one with a small bass cone due to the surface area and the effect of the air sealed behind that bass driver. Does that make sense...??? And of course, a larger bass cone would have more inertia and require a more powerful amp to overcome said inertia. Things are seldom that easy...
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 16:29
I don't think it's quite that simple though. A loudspeaker system with a large bass cone is better damped than one with a small bass cone due to the surface area and the effect of the air sealed behind that bass driver. Does that make sense...??? And of course, a larger bass cone would have more inertia and require a more powerful amp to overcome said inertia. Things are seldom that easy...
lets not over-complicated this :eyebrows:
a well damped speaker is a well damped speaker...
the arguement or discusion from where i see it is about whether a well damped speaker needs an amp with a high damping factor to allow it to perform properly!
my opinion concerning the yamaha's is no!
on the other hand, a speaker that is very efficient and thus cone movement needs very little energy to move it usualy has poor damping factor ie, its ability to stop when it should is impared, therefore it would benefit greatly if partnered with an amp of higher damping factor to control its movement by shorting its back EMF.
although it is posible to have a loudspeaker that is efficient and well damped, but the cone material and any moving parts would have to be very light!
A...
Haselsh1
07-12-2009, 16:38
Does anyone remember the Trio Sigma drive amplifiers that had a damping factor of around 4000...?
Anthony, I agree with you and what I concluded earlier. A well damped speaker system could be used with any amplifier and not necessarily one with a high damping factor. It may be beneficial though.
Give us a clue what this killer silicon amp is, the suspense is killing me:)
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 16:56
Does anyone remember the Trio Sigma drive amplifiers that had a damping factor of around 4000...?
Anthony, I agree with you and what I concluded earlier. A well damped speaker system could be used with any amplifier and not necessarily one with a high damping factor. It may be beneficial though.
:)
A...
So I'll not pursue it any further, it's wasting members time.
Translated as: "I'm using that as an excuse to bow out (as usual) and thus avoid the difficult questions!!" :doh:
:lol: ;)
Dave, do me a favour, next time you decide to 'throw down the gauntlet' make sure you actually mean it!!
Marco.
Give us a clue what this killer silicon amp is, the suspense is killing me:)
And me, but for some reason he won't say............................................... .. :scratch: :confused:
Marco
And me, but for some reason he won't say............................................... .. :scratch: :confused:
Marco
This sort of thing annoys me tbh mate!
And me! TBH, if Dave wastes our time like that again and doesn't have the courtesy to answer questions he's repeatedly been asked to answer then he may find himself 'on holiday' for a week...
I won't put up with being rudely ignored!
Marco.
Rare Bird
07-12-2009, 17:35
:rofl:
Look fella's, I owned NS1000's for a couple of years back in the late eighties and I can categorically state that although the measured efficiency is quite high (IIRC), the over-damped and somewhat synthetic and "dead" nature of their presentation needs a heck of an amp to force them to give truer dynamics. The sealed box helps them to give tremendous results on percussion when suitably driven IMO and I have heard them sound quite impressive still, just not on most weeky ss domestic fare..
As for using valves with them, maybe the transformer coupled bass "sound" helped the Yammies no end (I know, I'm on VERY thin ice here) and the extra spaciousness and 3-D effect that valve amps can be so good at may have been just the ticket for them. I suspect Glenn's Series 7 power amp would have been good too, as it "does" air and space really well, yet has a sense of "drive" more characteristic of a medium power ss amp...
Please don't fall out fella's, we get on so well usually............:)
Please don't fall out fella's, we get on so well usually............ :)
That will always be the case providing people have the courtesy to answer the questions that they're (politely) asked, without stalling like a big girl when the going gets tough :eyebrows:
Let's get one thing straight, if you're going to launch in with significant bravado, making a contentious (and somewhat provocative) statement like this:
Ask me to bring a killer silicon amp which would blow the socks off all valve amps on NS1000's!! There, the gauntlet is down~~~
....Then you'd better make sure that you've got the balls to see it through!! ;)
That statement of Dave's set the tone for the ensuing replies - END OF.
AoS is not a place for the fainthearted to hide. That's the brutal truth. We will always get right down to the nitty-gritty during debates. Therefore, people need to be fully prepared for that and suitably thick-skinned - especially when starting a debate that's liable to be contentious. This is nothing personal against Dave; I like him a lot and admire his skills. It's just simply how it is here.
Marco.
Good. Business is growing up.
After the Matt-Shaun duel, now the Marco-Dave one !!! :lol:
I'll open a special gambling topic on ebay, me thinks money's to be made !!! :D
That will always be the case providing people have the courtesy to answer the questions that they're (politely) asked, without stalling like a big girl when the going gets tough ;)
Marco.
:exactly:
Two guys sat down with some beers to listen to three amps. To them, the WAD sounded best. I might have found another amp sounded better, but I wasn't there. Given a warm summers evening and a barby, they might have thought another amp sounded better.
Had any of the amps been checked that they ran to spec first? No. Were the valves matched immediately before listening? No. So as far as anyone knows all three could have running off spec in some way or other.
On the day the WAD won. That's fine by me. At least nothing blew up!
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 19:37
Two guys sat down with some beers to listen to three amps. To them, the WAD sounded best. I might have found another amp sounded better, but I wasn't there. Given a warm summers evening and a barby, they might have thought another amp sounded better.
Had any of the amps been checked that they ran to spec first? No. Were the valves matched immediately before listening? No. So as far as anyone knows all three could have running off spec in some way or other.
On the day the WAD won. That's fine by me. At least nothing blew up!
:)
Ali Tait
07-12-2009, 20:34
Sheesh! What happened to this thread?
Ok,firstly,it really doesn't bother me if someone calls one of my amps "clapped out" as I'm not precious about them.To be frank I couldn't give a toss what anyone else thinks.If the amp sounds good to me then it IS good as far as I'm concerned.It's nice if other people like them,but if they don't,c'est la vie!
As Anthony said,one reason amps have feedback is to increase damping factor.This is interesting in this case as I've recently lowered the feedback on the 813,which BTW Dave,is a transmitter valve like an 845 (854?) I reckon this amp produces 30w or so single-ended,from an 813 per channel wired in triode mode.Now,in my system,driving the statics,this amp sounds superb.The MF sounds very good too,but to my ears the 813 is better,but then I prefer valves.The 300b has had it's dissipation lowered as it's quite hard on the 300b's in original spec,so the output is quite a bit less than the 813,and it is easily the worst sounding of the three in my system.Given these facts,the outcome of the evening is the total opposite of what most were expecting.The least powerful amp was by far the best sounding! Furthermore,the most powerful amp by a HUGE margin had the weakest bass.(Damping factor? how much feedback does the A370 have? I dunno.) The 813 had by far the deepest bass.Why? The 813 does seem to be a valve with good bass in general,but given I've just lowered feedback,from what people are saying,this should not be the case.As for the 300b,we were listening to it with feedback switched off,so that makes a total mockery of what people are saying SHOULD happen.Also,I would say that pretty much everyone who heard these amps would have picked the 300b.It wasn't just slightly better,it was head and shoulders above the other two,and we did try a couple of tracks at headbanging levels,and there was no sign of any stress.
Much as I hate to agree with Marco,he's right,there's no substitute for using yer lug'oles! :lolsign:
To be fair, Dave might actually be busy, and not ignoring the issue? (Unlike me, some people do have a life away from computers!) Just a thought - we can't always respond immediately on here.
Much as I hate to agree with Marco
Business is growing... :)
(I hope you don't mind my "subtitles")
Much as I hate to agree with Marco,he's right,there's no substitute for using yer lug'oles!
Exactly, Ali.
I can't be doing with endless pontificating and theorising when it's simply not necessary. At the end of the day all that matters is how things sound in real world applications, i.e. what Mike and you actually heard at your bake-off. Everything else is simply 'froth'.
Scalford Hall would've however been the ideal place to test Dave's amplifier/NS1000 theory in front of a wider audience. I'd love to have heard his "killer silicon amp", not just as part of a test, but if it's genuinely as good as he says it is, it's always a pleasure to hear great kit :cool:
Unfortunately, he threw down the gauntlet but then abandoned the battle... ;)
Marco.
Primalsea
07-12-2009, 21:00
To be fair, Dave might actually be busy, and not ignoring the issue? (Unlike me, some people do have a life away from computers!) Just a thought - we can't always respond immediately on here.
Yeh, good point. You guys seriously have far too much time on your hands. I only get 24 hours in a day over here on the Suffolk / Essex border. You guys seem to have much more!:lol:
Primalsea
07-12-2009, 21:09
Exactly, Ali.
I can't be doing with endless pontificating and theorising when it's simply not necessary. At the end of the day all that matters is how things sound in real world applications, i.e. what Mike and you actually heard at your bake-off. Everything else is simply 'froth'.
Scalford Hall would've however been the ideal place to have tested Dave's amplifier/NS1000 theory in front of a wider audience. I'd love to have heard his "killer silicon amp", not just as part of a test, but if it's genuinely as good as he says it is, it's always a pleasure to hear great kit :cool:
Unfortunately, he threw down the gauntlet but then abandoned the battle... ;)
Marco.
Bang On Marco!!
Theory and conventional wisdom only gets you in the ball park if you're lucky. At the end of the day its what happens in the real world that matters.
Put some speakers in a room and their response is instantly shagged. Connect an amp to some speakers that on paper should match, don't be too supprised if they don't go well.
3 way speakers for example should sound better than 2 way but a lot don't, Why? Cause the accuracy and engineering needed to actually capitalise on a 3 way design to its full potential is something that few people have (also stick them in a room.........................)
In the real world the subtle, non obvious factors start to rule.
Spectral Morn
07-12-2009, 21:20
Bang On Marco!!
Theory and conventional wisdom only gets you in the ball park if you're lucky. At the end of the day its what happens in the real world that matters.
Put some speakers in a room and their response is instantly shagged. Connect an amp to some speakers that on paper should match, don't be too supprised if they don't go well.
3 way speakers for example should sound better than 2 way but a lot don't, Why? Cause the accuracy and engineering needed to actually capitalise on a 3 way design to its full potential is something that few people have (also stick them in a room.........................)
In the real world the subtle, non obvious factors start to rule.
Excellent post :goodthread: I wish it said post.
You must always try it out and never assume it will work....on specs alone.
Regards D S D L
Well, all that is good, but it is even better if you manage to clarify some rules to such "subtle, not obvious" factors.
I fact, it's perfect to think that sometimes we don't know enough about surrounding world and some electric/sonic/psychoacoustic/whatever phenomenons, but believing that "theory only gets you in the ball park if you're lucky" is erroneous.
Fortunately, otherwise, neither hifi nor electricity would exist. ;)
Hi Alex,
To be fair, Dave might actually be busy, and not ignoring the issue? (Unlike me, some people do have a life away from computers!) Just a thought - we can't always respond immediately on here.
I take your point, but the fact is, I asked Dave if he was coming to Scalford Hall or not and which "killer silicon amp" he was talking about quite a few pages back.
He's since returned to the thread and responded to Anthony, whilst completely ignoring me, so it's got nothing to do with having the time to post or not - he was deliberately avoiding my questions! :)
Marco.
Primalsea
07-12-2009, 21:47
Well, all that is good, but it is even better if you manage to clarify some rules to such "subtle, not obvious" factors.
I fact, it's perfect to think that sometimes we don't know enough about surrounding world and some electric/sonic/psychoacoustic/whatever phenomenons, but believing that "theory only gets you in the ball park if you're lucky" is erroneous.
Fortunately, otherwise, neither hifi nor electricity would exist. ;)
I agree with what you say in regards to science. You can't abandon science but even the best scientists have come a cropper because they didnt consider the real world, have they not.
If theory got us the exact result every time (in hifi that is) surely we would just get the best measured amp stick it too the best measured speakers and it would all be perfect. Hey just like CD; perfect music for ever!! no need to ever use vinyl ever again;)
Of course I'm talking about hifi only here which is something that does not fit into absolutes.
Of course I'm talking about hifi only here which is something that does not fit into absolutes.
My God, how true is that... You're on form tonight, Paul!!
Quite simply, those with absolutist mentalities will never get the bigger picture with hi-fi, or likely ever own a genuinely superb system.
Marco.
I agree with what you say in regards to science. You can't abandon science but even the best scientists have come a cropper because they didnt consider the real world, have they not.
If theory got us the exact result every time (in hifi that is) surely we would just get the best measured amp stick it too the best measured speakers and it would all be perfect. Hey just like CD; perfect music for ever!! no need to ever use vinyl ever again;)
Of course I'm talking about hifi only here which is something that does not fit into absolutes.
Theory is incomplete. We advance by completing it.
Of course, the first scientist (or technician) who starts thinking that "we know it all" is, in fact, -by definition- working against science.
But, this doesn't mean that we know nothing or that what we know is automatically false.
In fact, when I find something which doesn't correspond to the rules, there are two questions that I can ask myself :
- Perhaps I don't know enough on the subject ?
- Perhaps I've found something that contradicts established knowledge ?
Needless to say, it's better to start with the first question first : it's more often true than the second.
Digital music is closer to a "theoretically perfect" result than the first turntables or first tapes were : it is obvious.
Now, let's look at the advance of turntables and tape recorders : it was immense in just a few decades. Well, I guess digital needs some evolution. ;)
My God, how true is that... You're on form tonight, Paul!!
Quite simply, those with absolutist mentalities will never get the bigger picture with hi-fi, or likely ever own a genuinely superb system.
Marco.
Too easy that, Marco. ;)
You can't use "never" in a sentence against absolutism, dear friend. :lol:
Too easy that, Marco. ;)
You can't use "never" in a sentence against absolutism, dear friend. :lol:
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate!
Hahahahaha... Indeed! Let's substitute it then for "unlikely" ;)
Put simply: the 'black & white boys' will unlikely ever 'get it'.
Digital music is closer to a "theoretically perfect" result than the first turntables or first tapes were : it is obvious.
Well, that's certainly not how it translates into the real world for many people. What did we say again about theories? :lol:
Marco.
True. Being humble is the answer, isn't it ?
People who thing they know everything must be avoided in most situations. In hifi, as well.
But, let's face it : they may be right. I never forget this. ;) (now, it's me who uses "never" :lol:, ok, let's replace with "rarely" :lol:)
Hahahahaha... Indeed! Let's substitute it then for "unlikely" ;)
To put it simply: the 'black & white boys' will unlikely ever 'get it'.
Marco.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zj6o_DZfSw
anthonyTD
07-12-2009, 22:39
hi all,
i am a great believer that there is an explanation for everything, unfortunetly we dont always know where to look, or is it that we dismiss everything that dosent fit in with our current way of thinking and analysis! well,,, untill we change our mindset or come up with diffrent test and evaluation processes then i fear there will always be things about audio that will remain a mystery!
A...
hi all,
i am a great believer that there is an explanation for everything, unfortunetly we dont always know where to look, or is it that we dismiss everything that dosent fit in with our current way of thinking and analysis! well,,, untill we change our mindset or come up with diffrent test and evaluation processes then i fear there will always be things about audio that will remain a mystery!
A...
I subscribe entirely to this view.
Moreover, I even think that listening, like other human activities are far too complex to be analyzed exhaustively. Even if we entirely change test methodologies and theories.
But, I guess we are bound to try to explain and understand most of it. It's our nature. :cool:
Ali Tait
07-12-2009, 22:58
Seconded. :)
Haselsh1
08-12-2009, 09:11
Back in around 1997 I used to own a WAD 300B PP amplifier. It was built for me by WAD, Nick Lucas and his gang and it cost me around fifteen hundred pounds. At the same time I had a WAD KLP1 preamp as well. Three years later in an extended moment of sheer stupidity I sold it all for a transistor amp. The WAD 300B has to be the finest sounding amplifier I have ever heard in terms of music. OK, it could never go loud and it hummed like a bugger but for the type of music I then listened to it was the best I had ever heard up to that time and I have still not heard an amplifier to beat it. My conclusions were based on the amplifier with NO feedback.
If I had the cash to go back to one of those amplifiers and if I could have it rebuilt for maximum effect I probably would. But the fact is that we should move on and not dwell in the past. I have plans for next year and they do not include a WAD 300B, however, my first set of comments still apply. The space and airiness that the 300B PP amplifier injected into the music had to be heard to be believed. I have never since heard anything like it. It therefore comes as no surprise that this was the best on the day.
Hi Dimitri,
Yes please!
Can we have this on a separate thread? :)
Marco.
Ok, tonight there's a match of OM-Real, it's hard to concentrate... :o
P.S I'm still waiting to see pics of the ART digital lead you promised in your gallery. Just to remind you like... ;)
:doh: Forgot last weekend, sorry. Next weekend...
In your own good time, my friend :)
Marco.
In your own good time, my friend :)
Marco.
You have to say that, with all the reviews and reports you have outstanding on YOUR To Do list! ;)
Like I said, it's tough being a popular big bastard! :eyebrows:
Marco.
I also love the fact that despite the fact that the bake-off has already taken place, every time I come back to this thread more people have voted! :doh:
Not any more they won't. ;)
FWIW, I owned the red speakers for a couple of years and heard them with many amps:
Rotel Michi RHC10/RHB10
JVC SDA1 class A integrated
VTL IT85 integrated
Lavardin PS/AS
Sugden A21
Meridian 501/555
ARC SP9/Sumo Polaris IIb
ARC SP9/Electrocompaniet AW220
ARC SP9/Rotel Michi RHB05
ARC SP9/Krell KSA100 Mk1
ARC SP9/GRAAF 5050
Very brief summary of results:
The VTL and Sugden had pleasing "tone" but not enough bass drive or "clout".
Lavardin sounded very lucid but oddly lightweight and wispy, not enough body, never sounded real.
All others bar two sounded distinctly average, ranging from competent-but-dull to offputting stereotypical solid state grey & grainy mush-o-sound.
The SP9/5050 was lovely, with believable timbre and tonality at all frequencies and surprisingly fully fleshed bass. Very nice indeed but limited power/volume capabilities before composure was lost.
The SP9/Krell was the overall winner. Not quite the beauty of the GRAAF but close enough, all of the time and at any volume. The KSA100 was the only amp on the list able to really wake the Yamahas up and make them sound as vivid as the paintjob. Massive bass depth and control, and very civilised mids and treble. And you could just keep on turning the volume up with no apparent distress from either amp or speakers. The character of the sound didn't change at all but the music seemed to get bigger rather than louder. Hard to put into words but very impressive when heard.
The KSA100 was Krell's first product and mine was a very early example, serial number 144. Dual mono construction in a single box producing 2 x 100wpc in pure class A (fan cooled) into 8ohms. 200w into 4, 400w into 2, 800 into 1. So quite a stiff power supply and, I believe, a high electrical damping factor. No idea how much this contributed to the good sonic results but may be relevant. Curiously, the Krell sounded good if unspectacular into other more "mainstream" speakers. But with the Yamahas, it absolutely stuffed all the other amps mentioned above, some of which are generally thought of as pretty good.
HiFi and "synergy" are curious things.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.