+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Greetings Artofsounders!

  1. #11
    Join Date: May 2018

    Location: Woking

    Posts: 32
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Hi Barry,

    advice most welcome. I think the stacked project is going to take some serious planning. Plus no small part will be the convincing of the mother of my 3 month old son that I need to move out of my current listening environment (which I am most grateful for in the first place, should she ever read this . . . ). Its probably easier to simply move to a bigger house!

    Anyway, good things come to those who wait . . .

    I've heard the same on the amps, unfortunately I purchased most of my amps before the relatively recent acquisition of the Quads. Had it been the other way around I would be using more appropriate amplification. Interesting re the TL12 and TL12+ - I shall go and educate myself and have a look at the Stereo 20 also. I used to have a lovely CR Developments 15wpc EL84 amp. It was one of the sweetest sounds I've ever heard. Even with relatively modest equipment it managed to make humble speakers sing so I would be interested to hear the Quads driven by EL84's.

    Thank you for your responses.

  2. #12
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 18,887
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Further to my comments on stacking Quad 57s, the usual ‘obvious’ method I criticised, is as shown here:




    I erroneously ascribed this as the method recommended by Quad. Apologies to Quad; their recommended arrangement is as shown below:


    (taken from Quad Information sheet 201)

    This is better, though I would still like to see both speakers arranged that the axis of the two treble beams are parallel, so they merge at a point 4.8m distant and 0.75m in height.



    You might also want to consider this arrangement:



    Though I would raise the rear leg of the lower speakers, so the treble beam doesn’t ‘fire’ over your head. (The Quads were designed at a time when people sat in taller seats than the do today, so these days the Quads have to be more vertical, so the beam is lowered and ideally be aimed at the listener’s ears.) Likewise, the upper speaker should be tilted so both beams merge at the listener’s ears.)
    Have you listened to this month's choice in the Album Club?

    Barry

  3. #13
    Join Date: May 2018

    Location: Woking

    Posts: 32
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Hi Barry,

    thanks for going into such detail with your responses.

    The last image is one I have stumbled across a few times whilst searching for threads regarding the 57's. The angle of the panels is a technique employed by some of the most expensive and exotic speakers available. Not that the expense or exclusivity makes them automatically superior, but with the amount they cost you would like to think they gained some accurate insight from the R&D of such projects.

    Logic would also suggest that any slightly "grey" or weak areas of the listening experience with a single pair would be alleviated by the addition of the stacked pair without any loss in clarity or timing, assuming the beams cross at the listening position as you suggest.

    I also have small plinths placed underneath the rear legs in order to tilt the speakers toward my listening height when sat in my listening position. I have considered making a new set of legs to do this properly but for now it works. As the speakers are currently on carpet I know I would likely benefit from having them properly spiked but again this may be a job for another time.

    At the moment I'm just breaking in a completely new set of tubes with my new "upgraded" amplifier.

    For the first time since I started critically and analytically listening to hifi, I am wholly satisfied.

    All the tubes are barely broken in but its already a dramatic improvement.

    Regarding the upgrades I followed quite a logical path. I simply looked to improve upon the current characteristics which I believe gives the system its sound. I was actually relatively satisfied with the current sound from my system so if the new parts didn't work I would happily revert to the previous configuration and put the new bits to use somewhere else.

    I replaced the amp with the "2018 upgraded" version which has some nice caps, some silver point to point wiring and a much improved potentiometer.

    Ideally I would (as advised) like a bit more power but the characteristics of my amplifier more than make up for this for now.
    Combined with the fact this amplifier costs about 1/10th of the outlay I would have to spend on a "significant" upgrade, I think its a great stop-gap.

    I replaced some new (Russian) reissue Tung Sol 6SL7GT's (which are actually surprisingly good and a few of my guitar friends absolutely swear by them) with some NOS 70's Tung Sol's (USA made).

    Then swapped my Svetlana Winged C 5U4G rectifier for a NOS RCA 5U4GB. Nothing wrong with the Svetlana but apparently the RCA is slightly better and getting rare so thought I should snap one up now.

    Finally I replaced some brown base Psvane EL34B's (another very good tube in my system) with some Psvane 6CA7's T MKII's.


    Normally I don't like replacing more than one element at a time so I can truly make an accurate evaluation as to whether the change has been an improvement or not. However as I know the other combination of tubes works very well, I couldn't resist throwing all of these in at once. If it proved to be a disappointment I would have then tried different combinations until I was happy again, but considering the improvement and the fact the new tubes have barely 3 hours on them I am keeping it the way it is.

    Quite often I have found that changing something within the system yields a false improvement. By that I mean that the human ear reacts to something that is new or different and initially evaluates it to be a positive. However I have found after considered and prolonged listening that in fact, quite often something has actually been removed.

    My evaluation of the new tubes and amplifier so far would be that everything is more full bodied, extended and generally more coherent. The bottom end is definitely tighter and less bloated but the "bloom" I find so addictive is still present and probably more so.

    Dynamic passages of music have improved, so quieter parts seem softer yet more detailed and volume swings within a piece are more dramatic.

    With vinyl the above mentioned effects are further enhanced.

    I cannot wait to get home and continue to listen to the new tubes and amplifier break in. I think this is my favorite stage of hifi ownership.

  4. #14
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Essex

    Posts: 18,887
    I'm openingabottleofwine.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Opti-cal View Post
    Hi Barry,

    thanks for going into such detail with your responses.

    The last image is one I have stumbled across a few times whilst searching for threads regarding the 57's. The angle of the panels is a technique employed by some of the most expensive and exotic speakers available. Not that the expense or exclusivity makes them automatically superior, but with the amount they cost you would like to think they gained some accurate insight from the R&D of such projects.

    Logic would also suggest that any slightly "grey" or weak areas of the listening experience with a single pair would be alleviated by the addition of the stacked pair without any loss in clarity or timing, assuming the beams cross at the listening position as you suggest.

    I also have small plinths placed underneath the rear legs in order to tilt the speakers toward my listening height when sat in my listening position. I have considered making a new set of legs to do this properly but for now it works. As the speakers are currently on carpet I know I would likely benefit from having them properly spiked but again this may be a job for another time.

    At the moment I'm just breaking in a completely new set of tubes with my new "upgraded" amplifier.

    For the first time since I started critically and analytically listening to hifi, I am wholly satisfied.

    All the tubes are barely broken in but its already a dramatic improvement.

    Regarding the upgrades I followed quite a logical path. I simply looked to improve upon the current characteristics which I believe gives the system its sound. I was actually relatively satisfied with the current sound from my system so if the new parts didn't work I would happily revert to the previous configuration and put the new bits to use somewhere else.

    I replaced the amp with the "2018 upgraded" version which has some nice caps, some silver point to point wiring and a much improved potentiometer.

    Ideally I would (as advised) like a bit more power but the characteristics of my amplifier more than make up for this for now.
    Combined with the fact this amplifier costs about 1/10th of the outlay I would have to spend on a "significant" upgrade, I think its a great stop-gap.

    I replaced some new (Russian) reissue Tung Sol 6SL7GT's (which are actually surprisingly good and a few of my guitar friends absolutely swear by them) with some NOS 70's Tung Sol's (USA made).

    Then swapped my Svetlana Winged C 5U4G rectifier for a NOS RCA 5U4GB. Nothing wrong with the Svetlana but apparently the RCA is slightly better and getting rare so thought I should snap one up now.

    Finally I replaced some brown base Psvane EL34B's (another very good tube in my system) with some Psvane 6CA7's T MKII's.


    Normally I don't like replacing more than one element at a time so I can truly make an accurate evaluation as to whether the change has been an improvement or not. However as I know the other combination of tubes works very well, I couldn't resist throwing all of these in at once. If it proved to be a disappointment I would have then tried different combinations until I was happy again, but considering the improvement and the fact the new tubes have barely 3 hours on them I am keeping it the way it is.

    Quite often I have found that changing something within the system yields a false improvement. By that I mean that the human ear reacts to something that is new or different and initially evaluates it to be a positive. However I have found after considered and prolonged listening that in fact, quite often something has actually been removed.

    My evaluation of the new tubes and amplifier so far would be that everything is more full bodied, extended and generally more coherent. The bottom end is definitely tighter and less bloated but the "bloom" I find so addictive is still present and probably more so.

    Dynamic passages of music have improved, so quieter parts seem softer yet more detailed and volume swings within a piece are more dramatic.

    With vinyl the above mentioned effects are further enhanced.

    I cannot wait to get home and continue to listen to the new tubes and amplifier break in. I think this is my favorite stage of hifi ownership.

    Hello Chris,

    Oh that is so true. I'm often amused by enthusiasts who upon making a change to their system will report that the difference is "night and day" or some other form of hyperbole. Quite often there is a difference, even a marked difference, but a difference is not necessarily the same as an improvement. I too have been caught out by this expectation bias (especially if the change made has been expensive). So now I will make a change, and if I think the change has made an improvement I will live with it for a week or more, then I will revert back to the situation before the change. Quite often the perceived improvement was false, or not an actual improvement, but simply different.

    Regarding your 'tube rolling', it all sounds like fun. I have to confess that I'm not really a tube enthusiast, though a couple of sets of Quad II amps passed through my system, and I do have a Radford valve amp as a spare. But I have never spent much time with trying out different valves made by different manufacturers; I just took it for granted that whatever brand the amplifier manufacturer had chosen was the best for that amp. To that end, the Quads used GEC MO valve company KT66s with Mullard EF86s, and now the Radford uses Mullard (Blackburn Road) EL34s with either Mullard, Telefunken or Siemens & Halske small signal valves and a Mullard GZ34 rectifier.

    What is the valve amp you are using? I'm sure there are other valve users here, better qualified than I am, who could advise you re tube rolling. It might be a good idea to start a separate thread to discuss this; that way it will receive more attention than leaving discussion in the Welcome thread.

    Regards
    Barry
    Have you listened to this month's choice in the Album Club?

    Barry

  5. #15
    Join Date: Nov 2008

    Location: Belfast/Northern Ireland/UK

    Posts: 17,557
    I'm Neil.

    Default

    Welcome to AoS Chris
    Regards Neil

    System 1 (Living Room) : Vinyl: AMG Giro Turntable, AMG 9W2 Tonearm, AMG Reference Armcable, Air Tight PC3 MC Cartridge PhonoStage: Passlabs Xono Digital: Esoteric P5 SACD Transport and Esoteric P 5 DAC, Sony HAP Z1es Digital File Player + Audioquest Jitter Bug, Computer Audio: Veracity Audio Mystra DAC + HP laptop + iFi Audio i Power, Wireworld Starlight USB + Audioquest Jitter Bug Tuner:Kenwood KT 7020 + Magnum Dynalab Signal Sleuth FM Amplifier Cassette Tape: Nakamichi CR5e Integrated Amplifier: Balanced Audio Technology VK300se Speakers: Anthony Gallo Reference 3.1 Audio Cabling: Signal - Atlas Mavros, Audience AU24 Speaker - Atlas Mavros. Mains Cabling: Audience AU24, Analysis Plus, TCI. Mains Distribution: Mark Grant Distribution Blocks, Mark Grant DC Blocker Equipment Tables: Target Audio B series + Track Audio Isolation Spikes Isolation/ Platforms: Bright Star Audio Isonodes, BASE 01, SSC Platforms.

    System 2 (Music Room) : Vinyl: Turntable 1 Loricraft Garrard 401 Turntable + SME 5 Tonearm, Graham IC70 Tonearm Cable + VDH MC10 cartridge Turntable 2 Modified Technics 1200 turntable + Triplannar 7 Tonearm + VDH Frog Gold Cartridge + Paul Hynes SR7 PSU Turntable 3 SME Model 20 Turntable + Graham Phantom Tonearm + Graham IC70 Tonearm Cable, Ortofon MC5200 Cartridge PhonoStage: Balanced Audio Technology VK10se Digital: Moon Andromeda CD Player, Toshiba 9500 DVD Audio Player Computer Audio: AMR DP777 DAC + Dell Laptop + iFi Audio i Power + JKenny JKSPIDIF + Wireworld Starlight USB Tuners: Kenwood 8300 Tuner, Revox B760 Tuner, Leak Troughline Tuner + EAR Stereo Decoder ReelToReel Tape: Revox B77 mk 2, Revox A77 mk3, Sony TC-377 Cassette Tape: Nakamichi DR10 Headphone: Audio Valve RKV2 OTL Valve Headphone Amp, Headphones Grado GS 1000, Sennheiser 560 Ovation2, Sennheiser 410SL Pre-Amplifier: Balanced Audio Technology VK52se Power-Amplifier: Music Reference RM200 mk1 Speakers: Anthony Gallo Reference 3.5 Audio Cabling: Signal - Audience AU24, Kimber KCAG, Audio Note ANVs, Barry Hunt Cables Speaker - XLO Type 6. Mains Cabling: Audience AU24, TCI. Mains Distribution: Mark Grant and Russ Andrews Equipment Tables: Clear Light Audio Aspekt Tacks Isolation/Platform: SSC, Bright Star Audio Isonodes, Naim Frame Record Cleaner: Hanns Audio

  6. #16
    Join Date: May 2018

    Location: Woking

    Posts: 32
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Hi Barry,

    and thanks for the welcome Neil!

    Indeed, it would be a good idea to post my experiences in more appropriate places. Also my apologies to you for having to read my elongated explanations of a somewhat indulgent exercise, although it is quite liberating documenting and discussing my findings.

    Just to answer your question Barry the amplifier is just a simple Gemtune/Nobsound/Yaqin (generic chinese manufacturer) EL34 SET. Although this particular model has just been revamped with better caps and some silver wiring etc as mentioned.

    I have had a few amplifiers over the past decade or so, from super cheap to mid-end and this one (falling at the super cheap end of the scale) beats them all hands down.

    It doesn't just represent good value compared to more expensive offerings, it is just plain good full stop. Other amps give me a bigger soundstage or have superior imaging but nothing plays music like this amp. It passes the toe tap test every single time.

    Being a single input SET there is hardly any circuit to speak of. It's just an input connected to some tubes, connected to some output terminals via a potentiometer. I know that's describing any SET amp but this one is as bare bones as you can get. Therefore I believe that to be another reason it is so responsive to tube rolling.

    I must point out that to get the kind of performance I'm describing from this amp you must upgrade ALL the tubes at a cost well over the purchase price of the amplifier. Possibly one of the reasons people may have overlooked it.

    Here is a pic of the circuit illustrating its simplicity.
    Last edited by Opti-cal; 14-08-2018 at 14:29.

  7. #17
    Join Date: May 2018

    Location: Woking

    Posts: 32
    I'm Chris.


  8. #18
    Join Date: May 2018

    Location: Woking

    Posts: 32
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Wow Neil . . . . I'd better start writing up my gear sig ey! Love the detail in there.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12



 

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •