Goldpoint SA4M-47 passive 'preamp' winging its way to Marco Towers...

[Ali Tait]

[Marco]

This whole thread seems to me like a hi-tech sledgehammer trying to crack a peanut, when a little plastic-film pot would do the trick? Sorry, I just don't 'get' the 'have to improve what the designer thought was fine' vibe - not criticising, just increasingly confused.

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

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.

[Spectral Morn]

Just so that people are aware of the dangers of Cadmium, and can make their own minds up.



http://www.politico.eu/article/ban-o...-takes-effect/

Apparently, cadmium is also found in some LED televisions. I didn't know that.

Vinyl is pretty nasty stuff too

http://www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/hlthef/vinylchl.html

Regards Neil

[CageyH]

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.

As long as you don't burn your record collection, you should be fine.

[Joe]

As long as you don't burn your record collection, you should be fine.

Also, keep clear of any disco infernos.

[awkwardbydesign]

Not below 500nm its not.

I could have used more accurate language, I could have said it did not have a linear transfer function, or I could have shown a FFT of its distortion spectra, but given the nature of most readers of this forum I chose language that I believed would make sense to the most people.

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.

[awkwardbydesign]

Valves are more transparent than transistors because they're made of glass and you can see through them.

QED. But there may even be an element of psychoacustic truth in that.

[awkwardbydesign]

ALL mk1 and 2 Kans are horrid and distorted - it was designed into them and it got worse as KEF messed up the bass-mid units. The mk2 was a serious attempt to make them more neutral, but the box colouration became unbearable to me - ugh! Having that whacking peak up at very upper midrange made drum-kits sound impressive though

That was just the first thing I thought of, don't get hung up on the accuracy or otherwise.

Anyway, do resistor networks add distortion? Surely a proper attenuator need only have two value-selected resistors in circuit at any one setting. That way the loading as seen by source and amp would be the same, thereby removing yet another variable, would it not?

And a 24 way switch, and solder joints, plus resistors have a sonic signature, just like everything else.

This whole thread seems to me like a hi-tech sledgehammer trying to crack a peanut, when a little plastic-film pot would do the trick? Sorry, I just don't 'get' the 'have to improve what the designer thought was fine' vibe - not criticising, just increasingly confused.

But it doesn't, that's the point! Unless you think designers know everything, or that the bean counters don't get involved?
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.

[Marco]

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.

[lurcher]

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.

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.

Your solution to this is?