The perils of modifying gear

[Eileen Dover]

I have done many modifications to amps, cdp's and power supplies over the years. It can become addictive and the need for the next fix overwhelming.

It is hard to not think every mod is an improvement, often putting things back to stock is the only way to prove to yourself that you are not imaging things.

Most mods bring forth extra musical detail and going down that road can bring disappointment. All that detail has to be processed by the brain leading to listener fatigue and ultimately the system gets played less. I have been guilty of this and it is a relief to finally take a step back and realise what has been going on. When the system "disappears" you know you have cracked it.

What are the collectives view on this ?

[YNWaN]

Not just when modifying gear, but also when assessing it in general, it's easy to obsess over specific aspects at the expense of the greater picture - that's one of the problems with having specific reference tracks.

[Arkless Electronics]

Not just when modifying gear, but also when assessing it in general, it's easy to obsess over specific aspects at the expense of the greater picture - that's one of the problems with having specific reference tracks.

Also we can all be easily fooled by our own brain/ear interface, what mood we're in, expectation bias etc etc hence people believing they can hear differences between mains cables etc. Other examples being when trying to design a speaker crossover by ear (not a good idea)... I've known times in the past I've spent hours tuning active crossovers it to sound what seemed great at the time, late at night after hours of tweaking and using only specific test tracks, only to try it the next day, rested and on different music, and finding it so awful it seemed beyond belief that I could have thought it anything other than truly dire the night before!

[struth]

now now Jez, some folk do hear differences..in fact most do, although I will grant you that some are expectation bias.

[Arkless Electronics]

now now Jez, some folk do hear differences..in fact most do, although I will grant you that some are expectation bias.

Not with mains cables they don't. Entirely imagination and that's a fact. It's not even up for debate for me and I will always say to anyone and everyone claiming to hear a difference from a mains cable that they are simply wrong. Carry on....

[struth]

As long as its your opinion ;). I might add ive never heard any with mains cable either but others have, but that is just my opinion

[walpurgis]

They used to burn blasphemers and witches. I think that had something to do with expectation bias too. Not sure quite what they expected though? :hmm:

[YNWaN]

I entirely agree with Jez regarding the designing of speaker crossovers entirely by ear. In my experience this creates speakers that are very program dependant - good (remarkable even) on some stuff but really bloody awful on other music.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Also we can all be easily fooled by our own brain/ear interface, what mood we're in, expectation bias etc etc hence people believing they can hear differences between mains cables etc. Other examples being when trying to design a speaker crossover by ear (not a good idea)... I've known times in the past I've spent hours tuning active crossovers it to sound what seemed great at the time, late at night after hours of tweaking and using only specific test tracks, only to try it the next day, rested and on different music, and finding it so awful it seemed beyond belief that I could have thought it anything other than truly dire the night before!

Whilst measurements can be a very good guide to allow mass production of a speaker, it is rare to find a manufacturer that goes that extra yard and individually listens to each speaker, not that that is wrong in my opinion. An assembly of parts unless extremely carefully chosen with consistency, will otherwise be inconsistent.

Delving for a minute into a part which is not part of a speaker, but never the less an example,is a LM317. Whilst it is a widely used as a voltage or current regulator, how many manufacturers bother to listen to each brand of LM317 ? If you happen to have the time to look at internal schematics of each brand there are differences. ST for instance leave out a zener diode on the adjustment terminal, which happens certainly in the circuits I design, to be very beneficial indeed, Yet if I chose without listening I would succumb to the rationale of ... it will do, when clearly ST is the brand that sounds best.

Back to speakers, how many manufacturers will buy in 3 capacitors instead of one,or better still make their own capacitors- if the best calculated value is actually 5.8uf, no what they do is plumb straight for 6uf and say that's good enough, and probably add muttering - its only a speaker.

Cheers / Chris

[User211]

After my recent crossover mod which I have lived with for a few weeks, after having spent a few months with cheap components of the same value, I am seriously impressed by the improvement foo parts have made.

So much so I am trying hard not to spend stupid money on some really silly stupidly expensive caps.

[Arkless Electronics]

As long as its your opinion ;). I might add ive never heard any with mains cable either but others have, but that is just my opinion

No I'm stating it as fact not opinion. In ALL situations where anyone reports differences from mains cables they are wrong. As I haven't jumped into someone's pro mains cables thread to "piss on their chips" I believe it is OK for me to say that in this instance.. I won't even start on what I think of as the ridiculous ignominy of having to defend 200 years of science and the laws of physics against the subjective imagination of audiophiles! Heresy and a witch hunt in reverse...

[smangus]

No I'm stating it as fact not opinion. In ALL situations where anyone reports differences from mains cables they are wrong. As I haven't jumped into someone's pro mains cables thread to "piss on their chips" I believe it is OK for me to say that in this instance.. I won't even start on what I think of as the ridiculous ignominy of having to defend 200 years of science and the laws of physics against the subjective imagination of audiophiles! Heresy and a witch hunt in reverse...

I hear a lot of difference with my mains cables, especially when they are plugged in....:ner:

[walpurgis]

I hear a lot of difference with my mains cables, especially when they are plugged in....:ner:

Don't forget. They are directional. If you have them the wrong way round they won't fit! ;)

[fatmarley]

I've known times in the past I've spent hours tuning active crossovers it to sound what seemed great at the time, late at night after hours of tweaking and using only specific test tracks, only to try it the next day, rested and on different music, and finding it so awful it seemed beyond belief that I could have thought it anything other than truly dire the night before!

Lol. Been there myself (passive crossovers though).

I only tweak crossovers at reasonably high volume levels now because of the Fletcher–Munson curves.

[fatmarley]

After my recent crossover mod which I have lived with for a few weeks, after having spent a few months with cheap components of the same value, I am seriously impressed by the improvement foo parts have made.

So much so I am trying hard not to spend stupid money on some really silly stupidly expensive caps.

What caps are those? (I'm still searching for the perfect but not too expensive crossover cap)

[Ammonite Audio]

No I'm stating it as fact not opinion. In ALL situations where anyone reports differences from mains cables they are wrong. As I haven't jumped into someone's pro mains cables thread to "piss on their chips" I believe it is OK for me to say that in this instance.. I won't even start on what I think of as the ridiculous ignominy of having to defend 200 years of science and the laws of physics against the subjective imagination of audiophiles! Heresy and a witch hunt in reverse...

Among other good things, the renowned physicist Carlo Rovelli says "the foundation of science is an acute awareness of our ignorance". To use a well-worn phrase, true science is full of "known unknowns" and anyone disputing that we don't yet know everything is merely betraying their own lack of intuition, and glaring confirmation bias. Science does not stand still - we would not have progressed beyond Faraday and Ohm if scientists had not been curious to explore observations that science at the time could not explain.

[Haselsh1]

As long as its your opinion ;). I might add ive never heard any with mains cable either but others have, but that is just my opinion

Yes, I am actually going to agree with you guys on this one. Although my partner Sue and I have clearly heard differences with interconnects and loudspeaker cables, mains cables are a tad strange and we have failed to detect any difference.
What I would like to know is that if Sue and I have heard a difference, have we both heard the same difference..? Scientifically I guess there is no way to ever know but she has described similar differences to me.

[Haselsh1]

Maybe someone could answer me a question that has been niggling at me for a while...?

When a so called audiophile cable is made, it is apparently from a linear crystal of copper...? This copper is drawn out into a wire in one direction only so surely that may well affect the travel of electricity through that cable one way or the other...? In one direction it is going with the flow and in the other direction it is going against.

Surely this would make a difference on a molecular level...?

[YNWaN]

Some cables are made from such copper but certainly not all. All wire is drawn in one direction irrespective of whether it is linear crystal or oxygen free (which almost all copper wire is these days apparently). As for your hypothesis, well I'm afraid there is absolutely zero scientific fact in it and if it were true would rather rewrite the rule book.

[walpurgis]

Maybe someone could answer me a question that has been niggling at me for a while...?

When a so called audiophile cable is made, it is apparently from a linear crystal of copper...? This copper is drawn out into a wire in one direction only so surely that may well affect the travel of electricity through that cable one way or the other...? In one direction it is going with the flow and in the other direction it is going against.

Surely this would make a difference on a molecular level...?

Mains electricity travels in both directions (audio signals do too). What you suggest is cables having an almost diode like characteristic. No mate! :)

[User211]

What caps are those? (I'm still searching for the perfect but not too expensive crossover cap)Jantzen Alumen Z-Cap. Aluminium caps serving an aluminium/Kapton Apogee ribbon. With PathAudio resistors and Jantzen coils. See HumbleHomemade for cap review. He's right and I am concerned they are actually better than he is admitting!

The combo of the above just works brilliantly in my system and there's no question in my mind that what works well in one system won't in another. You need a degree of fluke and the only way to know what is great is to try different combos. Spending much more on caps alone is no guarantee of a better result I think. Shame there's no try before you buy on boutique caps.

[RothwellAudio]

Most mods bring forth extra musical detail and going down that road can bring disappointment. All that detail has to be processed by the brain leading to listener fatigue and ultimately the system gets played less.
This doesn't make any sense at all to me. When you're listening to an ensemble of real instruments live in front of you you will get all the detail and realism there's ever going to be. Do you put your fingers in your ears to reduce the detail and therefore make the instruments easier for your brain to process?
Distortion can sometimes give the impression of enhanced detail and the effect is sometimes used in studios to spice-up tracks, but it makes busy music harder to follow. If your mods are giving the impression of enhanced detail but the results are fatiguing I'd guess that the mods are creating distortion.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

My system is so distortion free, I leave it on as i am doing at this very minute, to listen as I get to sleep.
Waking up in the morning is such a pleasure to hear it again.

[Eileen Dover]

This doesn't make any sense at all to me. When you're listening to an ensemble of real instruments live in front of you you will get all the detail and realism there's ever going to be. Do you put your fingers in your ears to reduce the detail and therefore make the instruments easier for your brain to process?
Distortion can sometimes give the impression of enhanced detail and the effect is sometimes used in studios to spice-up tracks, but it makes busy music harder to follow. If your mods are giving the impression of enhanced detail but the results are fatiguing I'd guess that the mods are creating distortion.

Hello,

Everything is fine with my system now but I have had problems in the past. I think I worded my post in the wrong way.

Uncovering hidden layer after layer of details has led to being disappointed with the quality of a fair few recordings, much to my dismay. Sibilance on vocals is a bit of a bugbear of mine and I did not realise how much there was on Stevie Wonder recordings for example until my system had become more resolving. I don't think metal dome tweeters help on that score much either.

[fatmarley]

Jantzen Alumen Z-Cap. Aluminium caps serving an aluminium/Kapton Apogee ribbon. With PathAudio resistors and Jantzen coils. See HumbleHomemade for cap review. He's right and I am concerned they are actually better than he is admitting!

The combo of the above just works brilliantly in my system and there's no question in my mind that what works well in one system won't in another. You need a degree of fluke and the only way to know what is great is to try different combos. Spending much more on caps alone is no guarantee of a better result I think. Shame there's no try before you buy on boutique caps.

Sounds like one to try then. I'd also like to try the ClarityCap CMR...

[Barry]

Don't forget. They are directional. If you have them the wrong way round they won't fit! ;)

:lol:

Reminds me of the joke (apologies to lovers of C&W music): "What happens if you play a Country and Western record backwards? Answer: the dog come back to life and your girlfriend walks in through the door".

[Starterman]

I have done many modifications to amps, cdp's and power supplies over the years. It can become addictive and the need for the next fix overwhelming.

It is hard to not think every mod is an improvement, often putting things back to stock is the only way to prove to yourself that you are not imaging things.

Most mods bring forth extra musical detail and going down that road can bring disappointment. All that detail has to be processed by the brain leading to listener fatigue and ultimately the system gets played less. I have been guilty of this and it is a relief to finally take a step back and realise what has been going on. When the system "disappears" you know you have cracked it.

What are the collectives view on this ?

I completely agree.
Many people make the mistake of modifying very decent kit and end up with an unbalanced result.
Far better to mod average or poor kit, more chance of success that way.

I like building kit but don't bother much with modifying stuff nowdays. Although I suppose that since almost all my hifi kit is DIY, then I call it development not modding. :)

[Marco]

Among other good things, the renowned physicist Carlo Rovelli says "the foundation of science is an acute awareness of our ignorance". To use a well-worn phrase, true science is full of "known unknowns" and anyone disputing that we don't yet know everything is merely betraying their own lack of intuition, and glaring confirmation bias. Science does not stand still - we would not have progressed beyond Faraday and Ohm if scientists had not been curious to explore observations that science at the time could not explain.

Good post, Hugo! And so true. Rovelli has it spot on. The other bit I also consider is a fundamental truism.

Jez, take note... ;)

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Michael,

Good question and an interesting topic, especially for me as an avid 'gear modifier'. Based on my experience, this is the fundamental point:


Most mods bring forth extra musical detail and going down that road can bring disappointment. All that detail has to be processed by the brain leading to listener fatigue and ultimately the system gets played less.

If it's genuine *musical* detail (as in simply revealing more information on recordings), then it's never a problem, or rather should never be a problem.

However... The problem is in ascertaining what is musical detail and what is simply tonal artifice, masquerading as musical detail, as often the creation of a brighter, more 'etched', superficially 'clearer' sound is mistaken for improved detail retrieval, or a more 'accurate' sound, and that's when too much of it can lead to listener fatigue.

In order for your system to "disappear", as outlined, you need to minimise tonal artifice and maximise musical detail. Sounds simple, but unfortunately experimenting (trial and error using combinations of different components) is the only answer, and eventually you reach the point where you get good at separating one from the other, until the 'recipe' is right.

That's what I did when modifying my kit, mostly with great success. Hope you find your way :)

Marco.

[walpurgis]

Among other good things, the renowned physicist Carlo Rovelli says "the foundation of science is an acute awareness of our ignorance". To use a well-worn phrase, true science is full of "known unknowns" and anyone disputing that we don't yet know everything is merely betraying their own lack of intuition, and glaring confirmation bias. Science does not stand still - we would not have progressed beyond Faraday and Ohm if scientists had not been curious to explore observations that science at the time could not explain.

I honestly think we are still at the early development of science and technology. Assuming the rate of advances accelerates as it has over the last century and a half. In fifty years time, where we are now, will then look like the earlier steam age and first use of photography. Just my opinion mind you. What the future may hold should be mind boggling!! :)

Unless of course everybody is dead from apocalyptic war, mass contagion or starvation. :eek:

[sq225917]

Interconnects can sound different.
Loudspeaker cables can sound different.

Yet out of every field of scientific endeavour only a subset of audiophiles 'believe' mains cables make a difference to the performance of what is plugged into them. Why do you think that is? Our hearing is band limited more than all decent microphones. Oscilloscopes and distortion analyzers are two orders of magnitude more accurate than our ears, and no piece of electrical measurement gear is affected by sighted, confirmation, or any other type of experimental bias.

On the balance of probabilities, it does seem like the simple answer is that some of us are just fooling ourselves...being duped into parting large sums of money.

[Marco]

Oscilloscopes and distortion analyzers are two orders of magnitude more accurate than our ears...


Yes, but "accurate" at precisely what? They can only measure what they've been designed to measure, not what *actually* MAY need measuring, if we're hearing something that genuinely exists, but which said apparatus isn't designed to reveal.

In any field of work, you have to employ the right tool(s) for the job, if you want it to achieve what's necessary.... Perhaps things are being attacked from the wrong angle?

In my view, considering that many thousands of discerning audio enthusiasts all over the world, with good hi-fi systems, have reported hearing easily discernible and repeatable differences between mains leads designed for hi-fi purposes, and standard 'kettle leads', although undoubtedly it does happen, there's likely more to it than simply folks being fooled.

That's lazy thinking, in my view, and is often as much about objectivists resolutely not willing to entertain the existence of anything that falls out with of their scientific belief system, as 'audiophiles' being duped by expectation bias...

Confirmation bias, after all, (the tendency to search for, interpret, favour, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses) is just as controlling and influential a phenomenon, as its 'Expectation' counterpart ;)

Marco.

[Firebottle]

If I said I was expecting a confirmation of my bias, would that cover all bases?

:eyebrows:

[Arkless Electronics]

Interconnects can sound different.
Loudspeaker cables can sound different.

Yet out of every field of scientific endeavour only a subset of audiophiles 'believe' mains cables make a difference to the performance of what is plugged into them. Why do you think that is? Our hearing is band limited more than all decent microphones. Oscilloscopes and distortion analyzers are two orders of magnitude more accurate than our ears, and no piece of electrical measurement gear is affected by sighted, confirmation, or any other type of experimental bias.

On the balance of probabilities, it does seem like the simple answer is that some of us are just fooling ourselves...being duped into parting large sums of money.

Indeed that is the only possible conclusion.

[Marco]

Not at all, Jez. It's is simply your view. Mine (as stated above) is equally as valid, so the more you stamp your feet and tell me I'm wrong, the more I'll do the same with you...! You're qualified to judge things relating to your electronics expertise, but not what I can and can't hear! :ner:

The reality is, you won't change my mind and I won't change yours, so where does it all end? Answer: a pointless circular argument and (very likely) fallouts.

Solution: simply 'agree to disagree' and move on. Better still, don't make absolutist statements, designed to irk those who think differently from you in the first place :)

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

Not at all, Jez. It's is simply your view. Mine (as stated above) is equally as valid, so the more you stamp your feet and tell me I'm wrong, the more I'll do the same with you...! You're qualified to judge things relating to your electronics expertise, but not what I can and can't hear! :ner:

The reality is, you won't change my mind and I won't change yours, so where does it all end? Answer: a pointless circular argument and (very likely) fallouts.

Solution: simply 'agree to disagree' and move on. Better still, don't make absolutist statements, designed to irk those who think differently from you in the first place :)

Marco.

I could say to you don't make statements that go against ALL scientific knowledge as well :ner:

We'll never agree, as you say, but I also will never say there is even a remote possibility that you are right:)

[Marco]

We'll that's fine, and I'll say that I trust what my ears and (considerable) experience tell me - and always will, no matter what 'currently accepted wisdom' dictates to the contrary. Best leave it there now :)

Marco.

[Joe]

As a ham-fisted technophobe who can be (just about) trusted to wire a plug or change a lightbulb, I've never attempted to modify anything electrical. The 'perils' for me would include electrocution and sudden death. 'Listener fatigue' brought about by 'too much detail' would be least of my worries.

[sq225917]

Yes, but "accurate" at precisely what? ...

Marco.

Accurate at measuring electrical signals, the same electrical signals that make the music.



Think about it this way.

Either 'some' cable owners have fooled themselves, or every electrical engineer who ever build something sciency, and expensive and not hifi is wrong.
All those tunneling electron microscope designer- missing a trick.
All of NASA, missing a trick
The large hadron collider- missing a trick
Every military piece of hardware that plugs into the wall- missing a trick

Or 'some' hifi owners- fooled...

Just on the basis of probabilities alone, the chances of science being wrong is incredible.

It's as daft as believing in flying spaghetti monsters, and his less trendy alternatives.

[Eileen Dover]

My modifying past has mostly been concerned with trying to improve power supplies. I am not electrically intelligent enough to design an amplifier or dac circuit from scratch and have only dabbled around the edges like changing components, playing with decoupling.

What I enjoyed the most was say adding more psu's to a cd player or swapping out regulators. Also found it interesting comparing different types and sizes of transformer and their placement with regards to sensitive circuitry.

I have had to back track a number of times but hey it's all subjective learning. No test equipment here. Not everything that you think should be an improvement is actually better. This is not known until you try it on that particular circuit.

Give me a good EI transformer over a toroidal any day of the week.

[Marco]

Accurate at measuring electrical signals, the same electrical signals that make the music.



Think about it this way.

Either 'some' cable owners have fooled themselves, or every electrical engineer who ever build something sciency, and expensive and not hifi is wrong.
All those tunneling electron microscope designer- missing a trick.
All of NASA, missing a trick
The large hadron collider- missing a trick
Every military piece of hardware that plugs into the wall- missing a trick

Or 'some' hifi owners- fooled...

Just on the basis of probabilities alone, the chances of science being wrong is incredible.

It's as daft as believing in flying spaghetti monsters, and his less trendy alternatives.

Yes, Simon, but the key words there are "some" and "sometimes". Sure, some hi-fi owners will have been fooled, sometimes, with all sorts of things over the years (me included), just not ALL the time whenever someone hears something that doesn't conform to the contents of 'Johnny's Book of Physics', thus is automatically dismissed as 'imagined'.

Others and I have been experimenting in mains related areas with hi-fi equipment (mains leads, separate spurs, dedicated earths - all sorts of stuff), for YEARS. I first got into it in the mid 1990s, and since then have always heard differences (both improvements and non-improvements) with the various things I've tried.

In terms of mains leads, you don't even have to spend much to get something that performs better than a standard kettle lead.

I've got a lead constructed with Belden mains cable, fitted with quality, but not expensive connectors, and it cost me less than £30 - and that allows my system (even my 'lowly' home-cinema amp) to perform better than the poor quality items (in comparison) they were supplied with. It's not necessary to spend a fortune on these things, so one isn't always seduced by 'jewellery'.

Now, having heard easily discernible and repeatable differences with such mains leads in various different systems, with various different equipment, over the last 20-odd years, and then some EE comes along and tells me, ignore all that experience and everything you've heard to date, as it's all bollocks, I'm expected to just automatically do that...??

Come on! No-one who's got any faith in their judgement would :nono:

Therefore, I'll simply enjoy the genuine sonic benefits I *know* I've experienced, and when man-made science catches up with my God-given senses, we might get a proper explanation for what's going on, other than (rather lazily) automatically laying it at the door of being fooled...

Plus, as I've said, I believe that as much as people may sometimes be fooled by expectation bias, so are they also fooled by confirmation bias: the tendency to process information in a way that conforms to one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. I suspect that quite a few objectivists in particular, suffer from the latter ;)

Marco.

[F575M]

From Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic, October 2006.

"There is one particular audio fraud, however, that requires no science but just ordinary common sense to see through. I’m talking about power cords—yes, those short lengths of flexible insulated cable that go between your wall outlet and your audio gear. The big lie is that they hugely affect the sound. The ads tell you that if you pay $499 or $995* or some such insane amount for a specially designed super cord, you will get a bigger soundstage, better transients, tighter bass, smoother highs, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah. Amazingly, quite a few nonthinking audiophiles with deep pockets buy these fantasy cords.

Now, just think about it. The AC current comes into your residence over miles and miles of wire. After it enters the walls of your house or apartment, it again traverses huge lengths of BX cable or similar wiring. After it comes out of your wall outlet through the power cord and enters your amplifier or other equipment, it again goes through a maze of wiring before activating the devices that affect the sound. So, tell me, how does the electricity know where the nondescript lo-fi wiring stops and the super wire—just six feet of it—starts and leaves off? Does the current say, hey, I’m coming out of the wall now, the next six feet are crucial? Come on. The power cord represents an infinitesimal fraction of the AC current’s total path. Even if the wire in the power cord were so much better, it would have to be stretched all the way back to the power station to make a difference! It’s pure bull on the face of it; no science needed. The fact is that any power cord rated to handle domestic AC voltages and currents is as good as any other. The power cord that came with your amplifier or receiver will give you optimum performance. If you have to buy an extra one, just make sure it’s thick enough in gauge for heavy-duty equipment. If you pay more than a few bucks, you’ve been had. (Besides, as I’ve stated a number times before, your audio circuits don’t know and don’t care what’s on the AC side of the power transformer. What they’re interested in is the DC voltages they need. But that’s engineering science…)"

PS: Nordost Odin, the retail price as of today is $16,999.99 for a 1.25 meter length; additional 1.25 meter increments are $4,999.99.

Cheers,

[Marco]

Each to his or her own I guess, Horacio. Theories are one thing, practical experience is another.

As I said, however, I've got a very good 'no-nonsense' mains power lead here, from Belden, who supply various types of high-quality cables for professional installations and broadcast use that cost me £30.00, not $16,999.99, and which subtly improves (but in a very worthwhile way) the SQ of the components to which it's connected.

I don't buy into the 'night and day' difference thing, with any cables. If that's the effect gained, then chances are there was something pretty wrong with what was being used before, or the new 'wonder cables' are tailoring the sound like a tone control - and that's definitely not for me.

In terms of mains leads, I simply see it as 'good housekeeping', in any capable hi-fi system, to use something that contains high-quality parts (wire and connectors), just like the components used inside the equipment itself.

For me, it just seems a bit odd to power, say, a £20k amplifier, where every aspect of its design has been painstakingly tuned for maximum performance, with as you say some "nondescript lo-fi wiring". It simply goes against the grain to use something that hasn't at least been reasonably well-engineered and screwed together for its purpose, and which to my ears, usually makes a difference.

It'd be rather like fitting a plastic clip-frame to a Picasso.

Marco.

[sq225917]

It doesn't seem odd to me to use a kettle lead on a 100K amp, because short of using wire too thin to pass the max current draw it'll make no difference, assuming the contacts aren't arcing. And there's never been a comparison done that shows otherwise.

If it's audible, it's measurable... If it's not then it's just fanciful...

[Marco]

In your opinion, but please remember that this is primarily a subjectivist forum, so refrain from using words such as 'fanciful' to describe other people's genuine experiences. I won't tell you (or Jez) that again.

You can express your POV perfectly well without demeaning that of others.

Marco.

[Joe]

It'd be rather like fitting a plastic clip-frame to a Picasso.

Marco.

Would a plastic clip-frame be any worse, in context, than, say, a heavily ornate gold frame? What would be the 'correct' frame to use for a Picasso?

[Marco]

There's no 'correct' frame as such, Joe, although an ornate gold 'swept' frame would be the norm when displayed in galleries.

The point I'm making is that a plastic clip-frame would simply be out of place in that context, just as would, say, velour car seats on a Bentley, a pot noodle on the menu of a Michelin-starred restaurant, pouring ketchup onto some Dover sole, trainer laces fitted to a pair of handmade leather shoes - or using a nondescript 'kettle lead' to power a piece of high-end hi-fi equipment.

My point is that the brief (when creating something of genuine excellence) should be consistent, from start to finish, with every constituent component being of equal (or the requisite) high quality, and IMO, that applies to the design of hi-fi equipment, and the cables it requires to perform optimally (sonically), just as much as anything else.

Marco.

[Joe]

Fair enough. My 'thing' is books. As far as I'm concerned, the criteria for any book are that a) the print must be legible and b) if it's a scholarly text (as opposed to a throwaway novel) it should have useful introductory material and references, and a comprehensive index. I couldn't care less about the binding, whether the book is hardback or paperback, or whether it still has its dustjacket, or whether it's signed by the author. Indeed, I'd actually prefer a clean, legible paperback to a fancy special edition, if the former had a clearer typeface. A bibliophile/book collector would have different, almost exactly opposite criteria.

Much advertising, especially of luxury goods, is predicated on the basis of 'You deserve the best, this is the best. Only discriminating individuals like you will appreciate just how good this thing is'. I won't pretend to be immune from such messages, but as I get older and (I hope) wiser, I become better at spotting the spin. In audio terms, this is how much 'fancy' equipment is sold; another angle is the 'bespoke' one: 'You are too good for the standard issue that everyone else buys. What you need is my 'modded' version, which elevates the basic product to a whole new level'. Not all of this is spin, no doubt there are genuine improvements to be had, but it can be hard to distinguish what constitutes a real improvement, as opposed to a difference, especially once you've 'invested' your hard-earned cash.

As for fancy mains cables, I've tried them several times on both source and amplification and heard no difference. The only one I still own (a purple Nordost something-or-other) now connects the TV to the mains, as it's the only one long enough to reach the socket.

[jandl100]

I hear differences between mains cables. Always. Every single different one I have tried makes my system sound different to me, without exception.
I don't care if some folks think I am deluded.
I will spend my money how I wish.
:)

[jandl100]

After my recent crossover mod which I have lived with for a few weeks, after having spent a few months with cheap components of the same value, I am seriously impressed by the improvement foo parts have made.

So much so I am trying hard not to spend stupid money on some really silly stupidly expensive caps.

Got them yet, Justin? :popcorn:

[walpurgis]

My 'thing' is books.

I like books. But don't seem to have the attention span for anything 'scholarly' these days.

I read for about an hour each night before going to sleep. Mostly cheap paperback 'novels' from local charity shops. Trouble is, I have to try several before a half decent read is found. I hate those with large print. Clearly done to fill more pages and give a more substantial outer appearance.

[Joe]

I hear differences between mains cables. Always. Every single different one I have tried makes my system sound different to me, without exception.
I don't care if some folks think I am deluded.
I will spend my money how I wish.
:)

To be fair, I'm probably going deaf. (Though I do hear quite noticeable differences between interconnects).

[Marco]

Fair enough. My 'thing' is books. As far as I'm concerned, the criteria for any book are that a) the print must be legible and b) if it's a scholarly text (as opposed to a throwaway novel) it should have useful introductory material and references, and a comprehensive index. I couldn't care less about the binding, whether the book is hardback or paperback, or whether it still has its dustjacket, or whether it's signed by the author. Indeed, I'd actually prefer a clean, legible paperback to a fancy special edition, if the former had a clearer typeface. A bibliophile/book collector would have different, almost exactly opposite criteria.

Much advertising, especially of luxury goods, is predicated on the basis of 'You deserve the best, this is the best. Only discriminating individuals like you will appreciate just how good this thing is'. I won't pretend to be immune from such messages, but as I get older and (I hope) wiser, I become better at spotting the spin. In audio terms, this is how much 'fancy' equipment is sold; another angle is the 'bespoke' one: 'You are too good for the standard issue that everyone else buys. What you need is my 'modded' version, which elevates the basic product to a whole new level'. Not all of this is spin, no doubt there are genuine improvements to be had, but it can be hard to distinguish what constitutes a real improvement, as opposed to a difference, especially once you've 'invested' your hard-earned cash.

As for fancy mains cables, I've tried them several times on both source and amplification and heard no difference. The only one I still own (a purple Nordost something-or-other) now connects the TV to the mains, as it's the only one long enough to reach the socket.

Again, fair enough. Your criteria for how good something needs to be, in order for it to be 'fit for purpose' is equally as valid as mine. However, I've always been a perfectionist and someone who demands to get the *absolute best* out of anything I use, which I value.

It doesn't matter if it's a TV, a computer, a car, the food I eat or a hi-fi system; I need to *know* that I've done the absolute most, within my capabilities, to release its FULL potential, which is why, for me, 'adequate' is never enough :nono:

I've mentioned that we're very different people, and I suspect that's one area where it certainly applies :)

Marco.

[Joe]

I like books. But don't seem to have the attention span for anything 'scholarly' these days.

I read for about an hour each night before going to sleep. Mostly cheap paperback 'novels' from local charity shops. Trouble is, I have to try several before a half decent read is found. I hate those with large print. Clearly done to fill more pages and give a more substantial outer appearance.

I can (and do) read both; the scholarly stuff in the daytime, the cheap novels at bedtime (mostly whodunnits). My memory has never been that good, so as long as I leave a long enough time between reads, I can re-read them a second or even a third time and still be surprised by the ending.

I've just picked up two massive tomes 'The Victorian Country House' and 'Life in the Country House' by Mark Girouard, for 1p each plus postage. I coveted those books when they first came out in the late '70s at £20 and were out of my financial reach.

[Marco]

I hear differences between mains cables. Always. Every single different one I have tried makes my system sound different to me, without exception.
I don't care if some folks think I am deluded.
I will spend my money how I wish.


Precisely, and neither do I, but I (and other staunch subjectivists here, such as you) will not have their valid experiences demeaned or ridiculed by blinkered 'science first' objectivists.

I don't give the slightest flying fuck what 'science says', if my ears tell me differently - and crucially after I've tested something to my satisfaction, over many years, and thus I'm confident my judgement is correct!

And *that* way of thinking is fundamental to the AoS ethos, and the approach we will always champion here, with all aspects of audio. If you don't like that or disagree, then find somewhere else to nurture your objectivist belief system.

Marco.

[Joe]

I've mentioned that we're very different people, and I suspect that's one area where it certainly applies :)

Marco.

Yeah. I'm easily pleased, and lazy as fuck. Plus I did all that monkeying about with special cables, supports, you name it, back in the late '80s, and eventually came to the conclusion that life was too short.

[Macca]

If mains cables really make no difference at all and any old kettle lead will do then why did my Krell amp come with its own mains cable and why do Krell advise in the manual that if you use any other lead the world will come to an end? (They don't actually say the world will end but it is implied).

[Marco]

Yeah. I'm easily pleased, and lazy as fuck. Plus I did all that monkeying about with special cables, supports, you name it, back in the late '80s, and eventually came to the conclusion that life was too short.

I agree (there comes a point when you have to stop and say 'job done'), which is why I've taken somewhat of a 'back seat' now with hi-fi, as I've largely achieved what I set out to do, and now simply sit back and enjoy the fruits of my labours - and most importantly my increased enjoyment of listening to music as a result, which is where my money is now spent.

My head is in a very happy and satisfied place with the whole hi-fi scene, so the days of tinkering are largely over :)

Marco.

[Marco]

If mains cables really make no difference at all and any old kettle lead will do then why did my Krell amp come with its own mains cable and why do Krell advise in the manual that if you use any other lead the world will come to an end? (They don't actually say the world will end but it is implied).

They're trying to 'brainwash' you with marketing spiel, of course, so don't let yourself become a victim of expectation bias! ;)

Marco.

[Joe]

If mains cables really make no difference at all and any old kettle lead will do then why did my Krell amp come with its own mains cable and why do Krell advise in the manual that if you use any other lead the world will come to an end? (They don't actually say the world will end but it is implied).

Dunno. My Devialet came with what looked like a bog-standard kettle lead, and the advice that if you wanted to try a fancier one, you were free to do so, but with the implication were unlikely to hear much difference if you did. The Exposures in the upstairs system have captive mains leads, so there's no possibility of experimentation there (though Russ Andrews suggests you can make an improvement by cutting off the captive lead and adding a male IEC socket, thus enabling use of their £££s mains cables).

[struth]

If mains cables really make no difference at all and any old kettle lead will do then why did my Krell amp come with its own mains cable and why do Krell advise in the manual that if you use any other lead the world will come to an end? (They don't actually say the world will end but it is implied).

can think of a few reasons:lol:

[Joe]

They're trying to 'brainwash' you with marketing spiel, of course, so don't let yourself become a victim of expectation bias! ;)

Marco.

I say give it a go and see if the world really does end.

[Marco]

:lolsign:

Marco.

[Marco]

The Exposures in the upstairs system have captive mains leads, so there's no possibility of experimentation there (though Russ Andrews suggests you can make an improvement by cutting off the captive lead and adding a male IEC socket, thus enabling use of their £££s mains cables).


Remember, Joe, that you don't need to spend lunatic money on a mains lead that's properly designed for hi-fi purposes. RA is known to be, erm, somewhat 'adventurous' with his pricing structure :rolleyes:

This lead made a notable and worthwhile improvement to the sound and picture quality of my Sony Blu-Ray player (compared with the piece of shit it came with): http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SILVER-Fig-8-Belden-19364-mains-cable-for-SKY-HD-0-5m-/262498180924?hash=item3d1e1c5f3c

£22. Absolutely ZERO 'foo' there - just basic, sound engineering principles! :)

Marco.

[Macca]

I say give it a go and see if the world really does end.

Might do if Liverpool don't qualify for Champion's League. Nothing left to live for then.

[Marco]

After my recent crossover mod which I have lived with for a few weeks, after having spent a few months with cheap components of the same value, I am seriously impressed by the improvement foo parts have made.

So much so I am trying hard not to spend stupid money on some really silly stupidly expensive caps.

Exactly my experience, too! Both my Tannoys and Celection 15XRs were totally transformed, sonically, with the fitting of some high-quality 'boutique' capacitors to their respective crossovers.

Some caps are undoubtedly stupidly expensive, but some no more so than decent interconnects from well-known companies, such as Chord - and I know ultimately which makes the most difference! ;)

That's the way to look at it, when spending your money: think 'source first' :)

Marco.

[jandl100]

That's the way to look at it, when spending your money: think 'source first' :)

Marco.

Bah, humbug. That's Flat Earth thinking. :spew: ... PR crap made up when Linn only sold turntables. :exactly:

My maxim is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. ;)

[Beobloke]

The problem I have with modifications is that some people don't know when to stop, or what the consequences are of the changes they are making. I have absolutely no problem if people want to mess around with interconnect, speaker and mains cables as this is a fairly harmless (mostly...) pastime but, as an engineer, I do get quite irritated by enthusiastic bodgers thinking they know better than the qualified design teams of large organisations delving into equipment and faffing around with it. I know of several manufacturers' repair departments that spend much more time than they would like, undoing modifications to their products to make them work again, and I've done it myself on more than one occasion.

As an example, internet "wisdom" has long prevailed that changing capacitors can cure all known ills but often it can do more harm than good - witness someone I know of who changed all the caps in his high end direct drive turntable "as a precaution" and completely stopped it working! A friend of mine who does a great deal of repairs now adds a minimum of £10 to his repair costs if the owner confesses to having already changed capacitors - I've even known him to take the new ones out and put the old ones back in, once he's proved there is absolutely nothing wrong with them!

As an aside, the latest episode that is annoying me is a chap on a different forum who is currently "modifying" a fine pair of Mordaunt Short bookshelf speakers by slapping unnecessary coatings all over the drivers, attacking the cabinets with a chainsaw and junking the crossovers. I used to work with the guys who designed this speaker and we used them on many occasions for reference duty at Mordaunt Short - they were actually something of a 'sleeper' in the range and incorporated much of the technology that was adopted into the new range that followed them, at a lower price. However, the stuff he's removing was there for a very good reason and I would put money on it that the damn things will both measure appallingly and sound hideous when he's finished, which makes me a bit sad. And why is he doing all this? Because some other "expert" on the forum is egging him on by telling him it's a good idea! :doh:

[Marco]

Bah, humbug. That's Flat Earth thinking. :spew: ... PR crap made up when Linn only sold turntables. :exactly:

My maxim is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. ;)

Whatever works for you, sweet-cheeks. At the end of the day, the results you achieve have to satisfy YOUR ears, no-one else's.

I'm just saying what works (and has worked) greatly for me. And judiciously upgrading things like capacitors and resistors, at key points in the circuit of equipment, has resulted in vastly greater improvements in my system than anything I've gained from changing interconnects or mains leads.

YMMV :)

Marco.

[Marco]

I have absolutely no problem if people want to mess around with interconnect, speaker and mains cables as this is a fairly harmless (mostly...) pastime but, as an engineer, I do get quite irritated by enthusiastic bodgers thinking they know better than the qualified design teams of large organisations delving into equipment and faffing around with it.


So did that apply when you used to work for HFW, and David Price was championing (from the rooftops, and correctly so) about just how good a Technics SL-1200 could sound, after being judiciously [the key word again here] modified?

Presumably then, according to your logic, National Panasonic/Matsushita Electric (one of the large organisations in question) had produced a better product *before* the modifications David rightly concluded (to anyone with a functioning pair of ears) had significantly improved the Technics? ;)

Remember that, at the end of the day, everything is built to a price! :)

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

The problem I have with modifications is that some people don't know when to stop, or what the consequences are of the changes they are making. I have absolutely no problem if people want to mess around with interconnect, speaker and mains cables as this is a fairly harmless (mostly...) pastime but, as an engineer, I do get quite irritated by enthusiastic bodgers thinking they know better than the qualified design teams of large organisations delving into equipment and faffing around with it. I know of several manufacturers' repair departments that spend much more time than they would like, undoing modifications to their products to make them work again, and I've done it myself on more than one occasion.

As an example, internet "wisdom" has long prevailed that changing capacitors can cure all known ills but often it can do more harm than good - witness someone I know of who changed all the caps in his high end direct drive turntable "as a precaution" and completely stopped it working! A friend of mine who does a great deal of repairs now adds a minimum of £10 to his repair costs if the owner confesses to having already changed capacitors - I've even known him to take the new ones out and put the old ones back in, once he's proved there is absolutely nothing wrong with them!

As an aside, the latest episode that is annoying me is a chap on a different forum who is currently "modifying" a fine pair of Mordaunt Short bookshelf speakers by slapping unnecessary coatings all over the drivers, attacking the cabinets with a chainsaw and junking the crossovers. I used to work with the guys who designed this speaker and we used them on many occasions for reference duty at Mordaunt Short - they were actually something of a 'sleeper' in the range and incorporated much of the technology that was adopted into the new range that followed them, at a lower price. However, the stuff he's removing was there for a very good reason and I would put money on it that the damn things will both measure appallingly and sound hideous when he's finished, which makes me a bit sad. And why is he doing all this? Because some other "expert" on the forum is egging him on by telling him it's a good idea! :doh:

It can be a nightmare yes... I usually add a hefty premium to my bill if equipment has been messed with and have also refused to repair a few bits of kit that have been got at to an extreme extent. On one occasion I had a big Jap amp in which must have cost the guy £30 in postage to send to me... after a quick look inside I repacked it and phoned him to say he will have to arrange to have it collected as I ain't touching it! Most of the wiring had been messed about with and all by twisting the ends together and wrapping them in sellotape!

[RothwellAudio]

Most of the wiring had been messed about with and all by twisting the ends together and wrapping them in sellotape!
Yeah, but I bet it was audiophile sellotape :lol:

[Marco]

You're forgetting about the effects of the famous 'wuffle dust' ;)

Marco.

[montesquieu]

I've had quite a few bits of kit modded over the years with fancy caps, foo wiring, 'special' NOS valves etc but nowadays I've become much more skeptical. Yes in principle we know that mass-manufactured kit is often value engineered with cheapest possible bits used where the manufacturer thought they could get away with it. In such cases it might seem obvious to use better wire or caps but it has to be done with extreme caution otherwise changes can have unintended consequences.

Where I would draw the line is making actual changes to circuits, cone mass, cap values etc - this is almost always bad news unless it's done by someone who really understands at a deep level what's going on. (I feel shame here in having a decade or so ago paid quite a lot of cash to have a pretty rare SJS Model Two preamp 'improved', only to have Simon undo the mods later for a future owner and find that an expensive bit of Kondo signal cable had been run underneath a mains transformer resulting in a small but definite hum in one channel. This was restored to original along with removal of a forest of expensive but unnecessary bypass caps. I guess I'm not the only one that has this sort of 'live and learn' story thinking back).

These days, on the whole, I prefer to upgrade (as in replace) kit when funds allow rather than 'improve it' - on the basis only of auditioning it first. A rather more reliable way of improving the overall system.

[Radford Revival]

A good general rule of thumb is that to successfully modify a piece of equipment you need two criteria. One is you have to be as smart or smarter (in terms of electronics thinking) than the original designer of the equipment. The second being you need to establish what parameter or aspect of the performance you want to improve. Otherwise you're just soldering in parts to feel good.

[Macca]

Yeah, but I bet it was audiophile sellotape :lol:

Yes, the well-known sellotape mod. It gives more of a sense of the musicians playing together. Or sticking together. Can't remember which now.

[Marco]

I've had quite a few bits of kit modded over the years with fancy caps, foo wiring, 'special' NOS valves etc but nowadays I've become much more skeptical. Yes in principle we know that mass-manufactured kit is often value engineered with cheapest possible bits used where the manufacturer thought they could get away with it. In such cases it might seem obvious to use better wire or caps but it has to be done with extreme caution otherwise changes can have unintended consequences.

Where I would draw the line is making actual changes to circuits, cone mass, cap values etc - this is almost always bad news unless it's done by someone who really understands at a deep level what's going on. (I feel shame here in having a decade or so ago paid quite a lot of cash to have a pretty rare SJS Model Two preamp 'improved', only to have Simon undo the mods later for a future owner and find that an expensive bit of Kondo signal cable had been run underneath a mains transformer resulting in a small but definite hum in one channel. This was restored to original along with removal of a forest of expensive but unnecessary bypass caps. I guess I'm not the only one that has this sort of 'live and learn' story thinking back).

These days, on the whole, I prefer to upgrade (as in replace) kit when funds allow rather than 'improve it' - on the basis only of auditioning it first. A rather more reliable way of improving the overall system.

Good advice, Tom. I completely occur. When modifying anything, you have to have a goal in mind of what you want, and a coherent plan of action on how to achieve it, otherwise there's a very good chance of failure, and ending up worse off than you were when you started.

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Will,


A good general rule of thumb is that to successfully modify a piece of equipment you need two criteria. One is you have to be as smart or smarter (in terms of electronics thinking) than the original designer of the equipment. The second being you need to establish what parameter or aspect of the performance you want to improve. Otherwise you're just soldering in parts to feel good.

Lol - I like that, and so true! I wouldn't dream of modifying anything at a fundamental level, such as you've outlined, as I simply don't have the necessary technical knowledge or skill set to do so - but I do have a very good pair of ears and a knack for discovering gear that has latent potential for exploiting!

Therefore, having successfully identified a particular piece of kit (usually high-quality vintage) I think has the potential to be even better after some judicious modifications, I ask one of my EE friends to do the work [I'm lucky that I know some very knowledgeable people], and follow their advice as to what they consider is the best way of going about things.

However, I'll be heavily involved in the selection of parts used, and unless given a good reason not to, whatever I fancy (and have paid for), which is electrically compatible, will be fitted. Quite often, with smaller projects, when it comes to component selection, it's simply a case of replacing like for like, in terms of electrical value :)

Therefore, fitting the same value caps, only of better quality, into the same place in the circuit, which is pretty safe to do, and on most commercial equipment will result in a notable sonic improvement. That's what I've done with my Croft preamp, for example, with great success (using Obbligato Teflon Tin-Foil coupling caps, Z-Foil resistors and Mundorf Tubecaps, at key points in the circuit).

Sonically, it now performs like a piece of equipment costing many, many times what I paid for it initially or have spent on it since, ultimately maximising 'SPPV', which for me is what it's all about - and many other areas of my system have been successfully modified in exactly the same way :cool:

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

Good advice, Tom. I completely occur. When modifying anything, you have to have a goal in mind of what you want, and a coherent plan of action on how to achieve it, otherwise there's a very good chance of failure, and ending up worse off than you were when you started.

Marco.

Unfortunately it isn't possible to do that.... One cannot decide, for example, to improve just/mainly the high treble... or the bass slam etc etc.

[Marco]

I don't set out with that type of goal, Jez. For me, it's about increasing realism and musicality [that's the aim], so that when I listen, instruments and voices sound as palpable and as convincing as possible.

If the by-product of that is improved bass or treble, then so be it :)

Marco.

[Beobloke]

So did that apply when you used to work for HFW, and David Price was championing (from the rooftops, and correctly so) about just how good a Technics SL-1200 could sound, after being judiciously [the key word again here] modified?

Presumably then, according to your logic, National Panasonic/Matsushita Electric (one of the large organisations in question) had produced a better product *before* the modifications David rightly concluded (to anyone with a functioning pair of ears) had significantly improved the Technics? ;)

Remember that, at the end of the day, everything is built to a price! :)

Marco.

Firstly, Marco as you know, I'm not as enthusiastic regarding the efficacy of Technics Sl-1200 modifications as you are, particularly with regard to their performance-to-price ratio.

Secondly, none of the mods we tested were carried out by 'shed-based bodgers'!

[Marco]

....and neither have any of the mods I've had carried out, to any of my gear, not just the Techy. All done by qualified EEs, who guarantee their work. I wouldn't have it any other way! :)

Marco.

[Macca]

Firstly, Marco as you know, I'm not as enthusiastic regarding the efficacy of Technics Sl-1200 modifications as you are, particularly with regard to their performance-to-price ratio.


You want to have listen to Marco's Technics, I think you'd change your mind.

[southall-1998]

The problem I have with modifications is that some people don't know when to stop, or what the consequences are of the changes they are making. I have absolutely no problem if people want to mess around with interconnect, speaker and mains cables as this is a fairly harmless (mostly...) pastime but, as an engineer, I do get quite irritated by enthusiastic bodgers thinking they know better than the qualified design teams of large organisations delving into equipment and faffing around with it. I know of several manufacturers' repair departments that spend much more time than they would like, undoing modifications to their products to make them work again, and I've done it myself on more than one occasion.

As an example, internet "wisdom" has long prevailed that changing capacitors can cure all known ills but often it can do more harm than good - witness someone I know of who changed all the caps in his high end direct drive turntable "as a precaution" and completely stopped it working! A friend of mine who does a great deal of repairs now adds a minimum of £10 to his repair costs if the owner confesses to having already changed capacitors - I've even known him to take the new ones out and put the old ones back in, once he's proved there is absolutely nothing wrong with them!

As an aside, the latest episode that is annoying me is a chap on a different forum who is currently "modifying" a fine pair of Mordaunt Short bookshelf speakers by slapping unnecessary coatings all over the drivers, attacking the cabinets with a chainsaw and junking the crossovers. I used to work with the guys who designed this speaker and we used them on many occasions for reference duty at Mordaunt Short - they were actually something of a 'sleeper' in the range and incorporated much of the technology that was adopted into the new range that followed them, at a lower price. However, the stuff he's removing was there for a very good reason and I would put money on it that the damn things will both measure appallingly and sound hideous when he's finished, which makes me a bit sad. And why is he doing all this? Because some other "expert" on the forum is egging him on by telling him it's a good idea! :doh:

Now, that makes me feel infuriated reading that! What a perfect way to ruin an absolutely beautiful loudspeaker! The person is an arse!

S.

[Joe]

I don't set out with that type of goal, Jez. For me, it's about increasing realism and musicality, so that when I listen, instruments and voices sound as palpable and as convincing as possible.


I wonder if anyone sets out to modify equipment with the goal of decreasing realism and musicality, so that instruments and voices sound as feeble and as unconvincing as possible? 'My system is too convincing; it sounds like the musicians are right there in the room and playing together at their best. Could you modify it so it sounds like they're playing behind some thick curtains in a different room and are on the brink of splitting due to musical differences?'

[jandl100]

These days, on the whole, I prefer to upgrade (as in replace) kit when funds allow rather than 'improve it' - on the basis only of auditioning it first. A rather more reliable way of improving the overall system.

Absolutely my philosophy and always has been.

Well, almost always. I have been tempted on a couple of occasions to "improve" the internals of kit, but it has always been poor vfm compared with just buying a better bit of kit!

I admit to being baffled when the first thing someone does on acquiring a piece of kit is to send it off to be "improved".
-- Yes, Tom, I'm thinking of you as well as some others! ;)

[Marco]

I wonder if anyone sets out to modify equipment with the goal of decreasing realism and musicality, so that instruments and voices sound as feeble and as unconvincing as possible? 'My system is too convincing; it sounds like the musicians are right there in the room and playing together at their best.

Could you modify it so it sounds like they're playing behind some thick curtains in a different room and are on the brink of splitting due to musical differences?'

Yes, easy-peasy. As Adam has outlined, simply apply some 'Doc Mods' to your speakers!!! :lol: :lol::lol: :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Marco.

[Marco]

You want to have listen to Marco's Technics, I think you'd change your mind.

Cheers, mate. I think Adam would be pleasantly surprised too, although his favoured Garrards still have better bass :)

Marco.

[jandl100]

The Technics 1200 mods are an interesting special case.
I can't recall exactly what Marco has done to his, but one I have seen and spent some time with cannot really be called a Techie 1200 anymore as pretty much everything except the chassis outer shell has been replaced! :eek:

-- it did sound fantastic, though, in a balls-out, ultra-fast, slam you against the wall kind of way.

[Marco]

The Technics 1200 mods are an interesting special case.
I can't recall exactly what Marco has done to his...


Erm, it's all in my sig below (right at the very beginning), which is why it exists in such detailed form! ;)

The motor unit itself (the best bit), and its associated circuitry, is stock. Pretty much everything else, aside from the plinth, has been modified.


...but one I have seen and spent some time with cannot really be called a Techie 1200 anymore as pretty much everything except the chassis outer shell has been replaced! :eek:

-- it did sound fantastic, though, in a balls-out, ultra-fast, slam you against the wall kind of way.

Yes, you're of course referring to Martin T's, which I've heard myself on numerous occasions, in his old place and at shows, and which I've compared my own T/T directly against in the same system.

Yes Martin's does sound fantastic, in the way you describe, but unless he's made some changes since, it was always a little 'cooler' sounding (more "balls out"), to my ears, than mine, I suspect mainly due to his selection of tonearm and cartridge.

The Denon/Ortofon combo on my T/T gives it a somewhat more rounded, musically mellifluous sound, especially when used in conjunction with the valve phono stage in the Croft (as opposed to Martin's Vida), but not at the expense of overall detail.

I did that because I'm acutely aware that the Techy has the tendency sometimes to sound a little too neutral and 'matter of fact' (for me it's a D/D thing), so I deliberately partnered mine with an arm and cartridge combination, which counteracts and balances that effect somewhat, in order to achieve synergy.

It's horses for courses though, which you'd prefer, and likely also music dependent :)

Marco.

[Scooby]

Interesting topic. I'd let my ears decide about mods but I'd never destroy the value of something.That's just my own personal choice.

I also think I'd take a long hard look at the person advocating the mods. If it's someone qualified and highly calable like Jez, then great. Someone like the Lampizator guy: Fine too. If it was just some bodger who can barely solder and has to quote Wikipedia when asked a technical question, I reckon I'd avoid.

[Marco]

Ah yes, 'Wiki-Boy', how could we forget? :D

Marco.

[Joe]

Yes, easy-peasy. As Adam has outlined, simply apply some 'Doc Mods' to your speakers!!! :lol: :lol::lol: :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Marco.

How do you know what a modded speaker would sound like? Have you heard one?

[Marco]

I guess the same way as the manufacturer concerned can wax lyrical on how turntables and speakers he's never heard sound, despite not having heard them either.

Marco.

[Beobloke]

Cheers, mate. I think Adam would be pleasantly surprised too, although his favoured Garrards still have better bass :)

Marco.

I must admit I haven't used my Garrard 301 for about 18 months and I do feel bad - it's long overdue for digging out, fitting an Alphason HR-100S to and enjoying!


Someone like the Lampizator guy: Fine too.

Hmm - have you seen what he did to a B&O Beogram CD5500? http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/REFERENCES/Bangandolufsen/Bang%20&%20Olufsen%20CD5500%20CD%20player.html

[Barry]

Absolutely my philosophy and always has been.

Well, almost always. I have been tempted on a couple of occasions to "improve" the internals of kit, but it has always been poor vfm compared with just buying a better bit of kit!

I admit to being baffled when the first thing someone does on acquiring a piece of kit is to send it off to be "improved".
-- Yes, Tom, I'm thinking of you as well as some others! ;)

I've done this on a couple of occasions: replaced the op-amp for something better in my Quad 405-1, and sent off a Decca 'Blue' to the Garrot Brothers in Australia to have a Weintz parabolic stylus fitted.

[stonehenge]

I had my Audiolab 8000A modified by Kevin Green at The Audio Cellar. I have no idea what he did but has transformed the Amplifier from being cold and uninteresting to allowing the drive and emotion of the music to flow through. A great success for little outlay.

[walpurgis]

Not wishing to seem rude, but having had experience of both, I'd sooner buy a Denon PMA-350SE for around £60 than a standard Audiolab 8000A and keep the change. I found the 8000A bland, but the Denon is vibrant and transparent with plenty of punch too. I've no idea what a modified Audiolab might sound like.

[F575M]

There are tons of discussions about comparisons but it is just so subjective and to the individual's taste that I think nobody is completely right. It is just like food or art. There is a 'general trend' but then come the extra spices and those then swings opinions wildly and sometimes in opposite directions. I think one of the approaches is to step back and say what will really drive improvement from a circuit point of view.

My Quad 405-2 has been upgraded with high quality capacitors [Nichicon], replaced main PS caps with 22000 uF electrolytic capacitors Nippon Chemi-con, PS supply snubber capacitors (two on AC side and two DC side) added, all ceramic capacitors replaced with high quality WIMA MKS2 film capacitors and CD mica capacitors, 17556 replaced with MJE15003. The op amp ICs replaced with Burr Brown OPA134, bridge inductor replaced with a precision high current inductor, decoupling capacitors added to op amp positive and negative supply lines, rewired amp's transformer secondary side and two amplifier boards, replaced internal wiring, new RCA jacks and new audio wires, gold plated binding posts.

My ESL-63 had been upgraded with new mylar panels, Cardas posts, Wima capped EHTs, zener clamp protection boards, input/spark arrestor boards, RC network boards, new protective screen and new grille cloths.

Hope this helps someone. Please see photos.

Cheers,

Horacio

[Barry]

There are tons of discussions about comparisons but it is just so subjective and to the individual's taste that I think nobody is completely right. It is just like food or art. There is a 'general trend' but then come the extra spices and those then swings opinions wildly and sometimes in opposite directions. I think one of the approaches is to step back and say what will really drive improvement from a circuit point of view.

My Quad 405-2 has been upgraded with high quality capacitors [Nichicon], replaced main PS caps with 22000 uF electrolytic capacitors Nippon Chemi-con, PS supply snubber capacitors (two on AC side and two DC side) added, all ceramic capacitors replaced with high quality WIMA MKS2 film capacitors and CD mica capacitors, 17556 replaced with MJE15003. The op amp ICs replaced with Burr Brown OPA134, bridge inductor replaced with a precision high current inductor, decoupling capacitors added to op amp positive and negative supply lines, rewired amp's transformer secondary side and two amplifier boards, replaced internal wiring, new RCA jacks and new audio wires, gold plated binding posts.



Hope this helps someone. Please see photos.

Cheers,

Horacio

Most of that has been done on my Quad 405s, save the amps have also been 'monoblocked' and have had two 35A rated bridge rectifiers added; one for each rail. I have not added 'snubber' capacitors as I don't think they are necessarily beneficial.

Looks like you have done a good job on your 405 Horacio. Well done. The only other improvement might be to remove the mains transformer's primary wiring 'tree' and directly wire the mains input to the 120V primary tags.

Will the next upgrade be to the system shown in your avatar? :)

[F575M]

Hi Barry,

I will not be doing any more modifications to my system in the near future. I am in the process of building a pair of Gradient SW-63 look alike using two Peerless 830669 drivers per side. I chose the Levinson HQD for my avatar because it is my dream system but I cannot even afford a tenth of it.

On another note, I noticed that you are in Essex. I bought a lot of equipment from Chew & Osborne in Epping. Nick Osborne and Ian Purkiss were the soul of the store, fantastic chaps, very sad of its demise.

Cheers,

Horacio

[F575M]

DIY Dipole subwoofer

http://user.tninet.se/~hme893k/mt_audio_design/mt_audio_kits/diy_sw.htm

[Mr Kipling]

Hmm - have you seen what he did to a B&O Beogram CD5500? http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/REFERENCES/Bangandolufsen/Bang%20&%20Olufsen%20CD5500%20CD%20player.html

Just wants a cover man Adam. A pineapple slices tin would do the job nicely - having ate the contents first.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170826/1b38fcc60f2d6cb5769ec06723b6c54b.jpg

Bet it sounds good.


Sent from my CUBOT_NOTE_S using Tapatalk

[Beobloke]

What, the pineapple tin? Probably sounds better than the B&O...