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

[awkwardbydesign]

BTW (1), I am almost certain no engineer from Goldpoint has read thair web site, they would have noticed this mistake "The surface mounted resistors used on the Goldpoint V47s are 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a thermal noise specification (TCR) of 25 PPM, same as on our V24s,"

What should it say?

[Marco]

Hi Nick,

Sorry, but that makes no sense. just because its small and if you squint it looks like a single resistor doesnt make it a single resistor. unlike the owner, audio doesnt care what it looks like, the reality is that SMD resistors are used because they are small and can be assembled to PCB's by automatic pick and place equipment. Then trying to reverse argue that because they are small and take up no space makes them in any way better sonically is just marketing bullshit. If you have 20 surface mount resistors or 20 of any type resistors you have 20 different resistive elements, and 40 contacts between the resistive element and the end conductor, and 40 end cap to PCB solder joint. With a single resistor you have 1 resistive element, two end caps, and two solder joints.

Ok, sure. I accept all that. None of it, though, automatically makes SMDs bad. The only reason I've highlighted Goldpoint's position on the matter (and what the above article outlined) is because it reflects my experience, and most importantly, it's what my ears tell me.

The DACT 'series'-type stepped attenuator in the Croft, which also uses SMD resistors, sounds superb, and to my ears is better than any 'conventional' attenuator, for example the Glasshouse Takman I had before it. Furthermore, in all the years I've used the DACT, on the Croft, I've never been tempted to upgrade it with different resistors, which I also think tells its own story...

Therefore that fact, and given that the Goldpoint, fitted with similar SMD resistors (which I'm using now solely as shunts), sounds equally superb, proves to me that there's either something in what they say, or that SMD resistors aren't as bad as some folk think!

When it suits them they use the same but reversed argument when they make a thing of the advantage of only having the one switch contact in the signal.

Yes, but it is an undeniable advantage of series-type attenuators. SMD resistors also have shorter signal paths than the conventional variety. Both factors are likely to be partly responsible for the excellent results I'm getting.

But you could and did, thats exactly what you heard when you replaced the 30 or so surface mount resistors with a single shunt, the improvement you have heard (even with a cheap SINGLE metal film resistor) show that the SMD ones are not transparent as they claim.

Well, the biggest improvement would've been gained by introducing the shunt, and in the process removing all those resistors from the signal path, regardless of what type of resistors they were!

In that respect, I've no idea why Goldpoint don't design their series-type passive devices that way originally (as 'shunt-types', like how Duncan has done it, and in a way getting the best of both worlds), as for me, it's a no-brainer. I know that Goldpoint prefer the 'all-series' approach to passives, but it isn't the best way of doing things.

Shunt isn't always best either, especially in an active preamp, as some lower-gain devices don't like the subsequent reduction in gain, caused by reducing voltage (such as the Croft), and can sound soft and 'limp' as a result. Returning to the SMD resistors in the Goldpoint (now being uses as shunts), they may indeed not sound as good as Z-foils would in there, but my point is that they're definitely transparent enough not to act as a significant bottleneck!

Now, again, the shunt resistor(s) may have less effect on the sound than the series one, but I think its certain that it will have some. as you say, you may try this later so it will be interesting what you find.

Indeed. The plan eventually will be to replace the SMD shunts with Z-Foils. I'm pretty certain that will be better, but like I said, given the superb sound I'm enjoying at the moment, I'm in no real rush to go there

If you are only using position 3-10 on the switch, if you decide to try single resistors, you may as well just use a 24 way switch and spread the values from to your current 10 over those points. You could use a 12 way switch, but I suspect psychologically you prefer the control to be in the lower half of its travel under normal use.

Indeed, but I still like retaining the flexibility of more steps, in order if necessary, to accommodate the replay of very low-level recordings, such as can be the case sometimes with classical music. The extra steps are unlikely to be used, but I'd still rather they were there if I need them.

BTW (1), I am almost certain no engineer from Goldpoint has read thair web site, they would have noticed this mistake "The surface mounted resistors used on the Goldpoint V47s are 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a thermal noise specification (TCR) of 25 PPM, same as on our V24s,"

So what's their mistake?

BTW (2), "let's not lose sight of the fact that the best resistor is NO resistor", hence the point of inductive designs.

In order to understand your point I would need to know what an inductive design is, and how it differs from what I have....?

Marco.

[Barry]

Goldpoint's website quote should read: "... 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) of 25ppm (/degC), same as on our V24s".

[Marco]

Just noticed this post, sorry Richard:

And initially you liked the extra weight of the ANs.

Yes, because I thought that weight was meant to be there. We got away with it more in Duncan's system, because he uses small (modern) stand-mount Tannoys. In my system, with much bigger and more revealing speakers, it was a different matter. In the final analysis, it appears that some of that weight was 'bloat', which isn't an effect I need or want. However, it did ameliorate a little with burn-in.

Therefore, for those interested in trying the AN Tants, it's something to bear in mind. Tonally, I don't think that they're entirely neutral, and veer towards the warm side of the equation, although they do sound very musical. The Z-Foils in no way lack weight: it's there when it's meant to be. They just don't superimpose it onto every recording, in the way that the AN Tants tended to, and they sound equally as musical, if not more so.

There is really no downside to the Z-Foils that I can detect. It's also entirely possible that, by originally leaving the legs so long for testing purposes, we didn't hear them properly first time round...

I'd say that in a bright and/or lightweight sounding system, the Z-foils may be too brutally honest (as they act as a veritable 'open window'), and so will reveal any system shortcomings. Therefore, the more forgiving, 'big-boned' presentation of the AN Tants may prove a better solution. At the end of the day, there is no 'one size fits all'. It's all about tuning the response of the components in your system, in order to create the most musically satisfying sound to your ears!

I wonder if the time or mood make a difference to our choices too. In my DAC I wanted a clean sound, but now some extra "authority" might be welcomed.
BTW, the Mills MRA5 wirewounds are available in 20k and 22k. Go on, you know you want to!

For sure, mood makes a difference to how we perceive the way equipment sounds. Fortunately, I'm in a good mood most days [nothing for me to be unhappy about], so I'm probably afflicted by that phenomenon a little less than others [especially some po-faced old malcontents elsewhere]!

I looked at the Mills resistors, and indeed considered them, but I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't be in the same league as the Z-foils. These babies really do deserve their excellent reputation!

Marco.

[Marco]

In that respect, here's an excellent summary of the Charcroft Z-Foils (copied from the earlier article I linked to), which mirrors my own experience to date with them:

That’s how things were until the Charcrofts arrived from the UK. Packaged elegantly in a black fold-over pouch, these Charcrofts certainly do look the part (see picture above). I selected 4 favorite LP’s for audition, and played a portion of each in turn before swapping the Shinkohs for Charcrofts, and then a re-listen afterwards to compare – “Brandenberg Concertos” by J. S. Bach on Decca, “Concored” by the Modern Jazz Quartet on Prestige, “Life Cycle” by David Holland on ECM, and “Jazz at the Pawnshop” on Prophone which is not really a musical favorite but is incredibly well recorded and a fine acid test nevertheless.

Lets be clear, I am changing but a single resistor in the audio chain. WOW! These Charcrofts are good – really very good. Listening to Bach, I immediately noted a deeper and more focused sound stage, and improvement to timing and pace. I especially hear a significant improvement to micro-dynamic contrasts, and from this a more lively and focused kind of sound, with the Charcrofts. The Charcrofts are beautifully clean and pure sounding, such that the Shinkohs seem a little veiled and slurred by comparison (but of course, Shinkohs are already very good). And, as is the case with the legendary Shinkoh resistor, there is no top lift or over etching in the highs from these Charcroft resistors.

The Charcrofts seem to be every bit as refined, as sweet, as organic and naturally integrated as the Shinkohs, it is just that the Charcrofts provide a cleaner window. On Jazz at the Pawnshop, improvement to timing and tempo got my feet tapping, and I could hear deeper into the background – you know, all those clinking tea cups and chattering amongst the audience. I also noticed that the clarinet was significantly more focused. The BassZilla is a dipole. Dipoles tend to give a wet, ambient sound, and at times the sound of a solo instrument can hover in the air, lacking a certain specificity in terms of image locality – err, exactly as you would hear at the live venue!

With the Shinkohs the clarinet was big, airy and a little vague, whereas with the Charcrofts the image was more focused, and locked in, whilst retained the big and airy, box less, natural spatialisation one expects from a good dipole. I could also follow the bass line with greater ease and could hear more texture and detail in the lows. The other two LP’s showcased the exact same type and degree of improvement, and I have say I am won over by the Charcrofts, so much so that I now wish to redesign my passive RIAA filter for use with a 100K series resistor, because I wish to replace my current Shinkohs with 100k Charcroft types (footnote 4). I think that comment says it all. Do the Charcrofts provide value for money – of course not (since when did the high-end ever offer ‘value for money’ as such)! Do they improve sound on a level that is worthwhile – you bet your bottom dollar they do.

Quite!

His opinion of the Shinkohs, in comparison, also reflects my own experience.

Marco.

[awkwardbydesign]

I just made the effort to check, and it seems the Charcroft Z-foils are the same as the Texas. But Texas Components will make any value to any tolerance ( I go for 0.1%!), so I go direct to them.

[Marco]

Yeah, sure. I'd still just rather get them from HFC. Nick offers superb service, and if I need anything quickly, I can get it the next day!

Marco.

[awkwardbydesign]

Fair enough.

[anthonyTD]

Every change you make is always going to be system dependent,
For eg, You may find that changing one interconnect now will give a diffrent result than before, this unfortunetly is the nature of the beast, and in some respects can detract folk from the reason they got into HI Fi in the first place, ie; the music!
Our ears, and mood changes from day to day, which also has a big affect on how we percieve music, and sound, so, what may sound right one day, well,,, you get my gist, that is why when you get a system to a certain standard of quality, the final % of tuning will always be subjective, personal choice, and not necessarily fact!

[User211]

Very true post #409.

Valve rolling persistently disturbs me. I'll be running, say, VT52, for a few days, then swap over to 6A3 and wonder why the hell I was ever listening to VT52. Then I'll swap back and think the reverse a few days later. The traits of the valves always appears to remain the same. What I prefer to listen to varies.

No soldering required, there, however.

EDIT: Which of course is not to belittle a little resistor rolling.