:lol:
:lol:
Lol - well, for starters, "what the designer thought was fine", might not apply in my set-up, or to my ears, so why should I blindly stick with it? I may hear latent potential which I think can be released. In which case I will attempt to do so, or if not, sell the item and buy something else, if it shows no signs of promise. I chose the former option - and it's worked out superbly :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DSJR
As you know full well, the efficacy of devices such as passive preamps is HUGELY dependent on how well they match, or otherwise, the partnering power amp, so what will work well in one set up, won't necessarily work equally as well in another, which is why you can take something that is inherently good, such as the Goldpoint (inherently good, in terms of the quality of stepped attenuators and selector switches it uses, which IMO are superior to any others I've had), and optimise it for use in *your* system - and that's precisely what I've done.
The relevance of correct matching was rammed home again today, when I took the Goldpoint over to DarrenHW's place (who lives near me), where we used it with his Quad 405s... It sounded great, but nothing like it does at my place, simply because his amps are hugely more insensitive than my Copper amp. In order to achieve my normal listening levels in his system, we had to turn it up to 2 o'clock on the dials, a level of volume I would have achieved here at the 9 o'clock positions...
As such, it sounded good, but a bit 'soft and weedy' compared with what I get at home. In that respect, all it would take to rectify matters, if the Goldpoint was to be optimised for use in Darren's system, is to change the value of the series resistor to (I suspect) 10K, from the 22K that the unit is currently fitted with. Therefore, with that in mind, how could Goldpoint possibly 'design in' maximum compatibility with every power amp their devices are liable to partnered with??
That's why modifications are sometimes necessary. When you're following a cooking recipe, do you carry it out rigidly, word for word, or adapt the ingredients to suit your own circumstances or palate? Well, hi-fi is the same. Nothing can ever act as a 'perfect entity' for all.
If you heard how the Goldpoint sounded here originally, Dave, compared with how it does now, I can assure you there would be no 'confusion'! ;)
Marco.
Vinyl is pretty nasty stuff too ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
http://www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/hlthef/vinylchl.html
Regards Neil
As long as you don't burn your record collection, you should be fine. :eek:Quote:
Most vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and vinyl products. Acute (short-term) exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride in air has resulted in central nervous system effects (CNS), such as dizziness, drowsiness, and headaches in humans. Chronic (long-term) exposure to vinyl chloride through inhalation and oral exposure in humans has resulted in liver damage. Cancer is a major concern from exposure to vinyl chloride via inhalation, as vinyl chloride exposure has been shown to increase the risk of a rare form of liver cancer in humans. EPA has classified vinyl chloride as a Group A, human carcinogen.
Also, keep clear of any disco infernos.Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
But it doesn't, it's inaccurate and misleading. My use of visual terms is just as inaccurate as yours. Which is the point I'm trying to make. You are assuming that everyone uses the term in exactly the way that you do, but I just demonstrated that isn't true. How many other misunderstandings are there?Quote:
Originally Posted by lurcher
It matters.
QED. :D But there may even be an element of psychoacustic truth in that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe
That was just the first thing I thought of, don't get hung up on the accuracy or otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by DSJR
And a 24 way switch, and solder joints, plus resistors have a sonic signature, just like everything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by DSJR
But it doesn't, that's the point! Unless you think designers know everything, or that the bean counters don't get involved?Quote:
Originally Posted by DSJR
As just one example, I built a Ben Duncan designed active crossover (HiFi News, 1981-2). He later updated the design (op-amps, crossover function, removing caps, PSU, etc) and I did the same with component changes. It made it far more expensive, but also it sounds better now. And that's just one item that I have personal experience of! Besides, some of us are curious.
We're on the same page here, Richard.
Some of us are also free-thinkers and demand the best sound possible, which as you correctly say, isn't always part of the equation with a commercial product. 'The designer knows best' mentality is the behaviour of a gullible novice, not an experienced and discerning audiophile, keen to hear his or her music at its best!
Marco.
So what you are saying (or not, maybe I have a different usage of the words saying, what, you and are) is that language is flexible and may not perfectly be used to exchange information without the assumption of agreed meaning.Quote:
But it doesn't, it's inaccurate and misleading. My use of visual terms is just as inaccurate as yours. Which is the point I'm trying to make. You are assuming that everyone uses the term in exactly the way that you do, but I just demonstrated that isn't true. How many other misunderstandings are there?
It matters.
Your solution to this is?