emaidel was right about the Hi-Fi Tuning fuses

[E-Stat]

Don't confuse sound quality over build quailty..two totally different beasts.

I agree. My Audio Research, Threshold, VTL and Manley gear is hand built to instrument quality standards using military spec components. It is quite different from mass produced consumer grade receivers. The Threshold Stasis is twenty-eight years old and has only required (preemptive) replacement of the computer grade Mallory electrolytics. It is also able to drive virtually any load, reactive or otherwise with its massive output stage.

NAD has a much a stouter amplifier section than Yamaha but unfortunately NAD cannot even come close to touching Yamaha in terms of relaibiltiy; reliabiltity having a direct relationship to build quaility.

As for NAD, I must be lucky with a T763 receiver used in the HT system. It has been trouble-free for seven years.

rw

[3db]

So, does this include a tube amp vs an SS?

Nope. Solid state and tubes are different beasts all together.

[3db]

Its called distortion spectra. While THD is an utterly useless and misleading metric, a deeper analysis into the makeup of the distortion provides the clue. 1% second harmonic distortion is virtually inaudible while 0.1% fifth or seventh is quite noticeable. Amplifier designs vary greatly in how they distort.

Nelson Pass speaks on the topic here.

rw

a measureable quantatative factor. Even order distortion would be harder to detect because its pleasant.....thats what gives vinyl that warmer sound,,,, odd order distortion is grating and easier to detect which would make explain your numbers.

[3db]

As for NAD, I must be lucky with a T763 receiver used in the HT system. It has been trouble-free for seven years.

rw

Thats a good thing. NAD was having major QC problems and even the salesman steered me away from NAD becuase of that. That was a few years back. Don't get me wrong, I love NAD and think they make great sounding equipment.

[3db]

[QUOTE=poppachubby]

No hostility here 3db, clearly there are a few who are. But I think you're jumping the gun a bit.

None taken .

[E-Stat]

a measureable quantatative factor.

Quantitative yes, but difficult to directly correlate to perceived differences. Which is why amps sound different under dynamic conditions, i.e. playing music instead of test tones.

Even order distortion would be harder to detect because its pleasant.....thats what gives vinyl that warmer sound...

Interesting. I've never heard that association before. Why do you say pressed vinyl inherently contains even order distortion?

,,, odd order distortion is grating and easier to detect which would make explain your numbers.

I had one of these Crown amps when I was in high school. While it was reliable, it sounded dreadful on top despite its 0.05% measured THD / IMD. Which is why I completely ignore distortion specs. In fact, my listening experience causes me to associate those numbers in reverse. Amps with exceptionally low distortion figures sound worse than those with higher numbers. Clearly, they have more stages and/or more feedback loops which either renders them hard and thin sounding (like the Crown) or unnaturally sterile (Halcro DM-38).

rw

[3db]

Interesting. I've never heard that association before. Why do you say pressed vinyl inherently contains even order distortion?

rw

http://forums.soundandvisionmag.com/.../t-449315.html

[3db]

Quantitative yes, but difficult to directly correlate to perceived differences. Which is why amps sound different under dynamic conditions, i.e. playing music instead of test tones.

I had one of these Crown amps when I was in high school. While it was reliable, it sounded dreadful on top despite its 0.05% measured THD / IMD. Which is why I completely ignore distortion specs. In fact, my listening experience causes me to associate those numbers in reverse. Amps with exceptionally low distortion figures sound worse than those with higher numbers. Clearly, they have more stages and/or more feedback loops which either renders them hard and thin sounding (like the Crown) or unnaturally sterile (Halcro DM-38).

rw

I ignore distrotion specs once they fall below audbale detection for humans. I see no value in this magic race of .00000000000000000000005% distortion ( exageration I know) if it can't be heard below .5%

[E-Stat]

http://forums.soundandvisionmag.com/.../t-449315.html

Interesting. Not bad, but the next question would be what amplifier was used for the cutting lathe as that could affect the results. Such information was not provided. Coincidentally, Telarc Records used the big brother to my Threshold Stasis back in the 80s.

Bob Woods at cutter

rw

[E-Stat]

I ignore distrotion specs once they fall below audbale detection for humans... if it can't be heard below .5%

That's my point. Upper odd harmonic distortion can be audible at the 0.1% level. Amplifier THD specs provide zero visibility to the way the amplifier performs under dynamic conditions where the amp generates the distortion. The Crown's 0.05% figure had no bearing on real world performance with its crude, first generation Fairchild op amp and class B output stage.

rw

[hifitommy]

feet have been stomped too much and i will do this out of disrespect of the acting up by a couple of the posters here.

THEN i am going to post positive comments on the fuses REGARDLESS of what they sound like!

;^)

[3db]

feet have been stomped too much and i will do this out of disrespect of the acting up by a couple of the posters here.

THEN i am going to post positive comments on the fuses REGARDLESS of what they sound like!

;^)

you go girl!!! )

[bfalls]

Quantitative yes, but difficult to directly correlate to perceived differences. Which is why amps sound different under dynamic conditions, i.e. playing music instead of test tones.


Interesting. I've never heard that association before. Why do you say pressed vinyl inherently contains even order distortion?


I had one of these Crown amps when I was in high school. While it was reliable, it sounded dreadful on top despite its 0.05% measured THD / IMD. Which is why I completely ignore distortion specs. In fact, my listening experience causes me to associate those numbers in reverse. Amps with exceptionally low distortion figures sound worse than those with higher numbers. Clearly, they have more stages and/or more feedback loops which either renders them hard and thin sounding (like the Crown) or unnaturally sterile (Halcro DM-38).

rw

In our QA and A/B room at CBS Records we used Crown DC300 and DC150 as well as McIntosh amps. I thought the Mcs with higher distortion readings sounded much better than the Crowns. It didn't matter which source, 1" master tapes on Scully playback deck or 1/4" on Nakamichi cassette decks. We used several different models Mc2125s, 5150s, etc. They even used Mc40s to drive their plant intercom system. I still have a pair of the MC40s. I believe their THD is .5%.

[E-Stat]

I thought the Mcs with higher distortion readings sounded much better than the Crowns.

Yeah, that was back in the 70s when the prevailing notion espoused by guys like Julian Hirsch was that if two amps had similar output, frequency response curves, distortion and were able to drive a given load, they would all sound the same.

I confess that I bought the Crown because it looked cool, had rack ears, was endorsed by pros and had more power than the H-K Citation 12 amp I was also considering. So I was 17 at the time. I got rid of it in under a year. After a short stint using powered monitors, my next amp was the considerably better sounding Audire by Julius Siknius. That was also the era ('76) when Frank Van Alstine was experimenting with beefing up power supplies. I had his FET-5 preamp (modified PAT-5) and applied the same concept to the Audire that he did to the Dynaco "Double 400". I added another 120,000 uF to the power supply via an external box and replaced the bridge with a 30A unit. That bumped it to ~100 joules or about five times that of the Crown. There was no comparison in terms of transparency and dynamic capability - even though the specs were essentially the same. It would also play for about thirty seconds after power off!

rw

[Mygaffer]

I have never been a proponent of the "if it exists, then it can be measured," or conversely, " if it cannot be measured, then it doesn't exist" mentality. How then would one measure the specific placement of instruments within a stereo image, or the breadth and depth of the soundstage? There's no denying that such a thing as a stereo image exists, and that some equipment is better than others in producing it, yet there's no way at all to effectively measure why one speaker/amplifier/etc. is better than another in reprodcing it. Nor is there a way to measure the soundstage either, yet there are enormous differences in both the width and depth of a soundstage, again depending on many of the different components within a system.

If someone here (myself, or others) claims to hear something as a result of changing a piece of equipment, or even a fuse, why can't someone who has NOT heard what we have, nor has done what we've done, simply accept such, and leave it be at that? I know what I hear, and having anyone telling me that I'm really not hearing what I know I'm hearing is rather pointless, no? What is to be gained by such an endeavor?

I know this is a really old thread but I am surprised that you would ask this question. Everyone on this forum should be very familiar with the failings of human hearing and the power of expectations. There is a very good reason people won't just accept what you've heard without some verification.

[Feanor]

I know this is a really old thread but I am surprised that you would ask this question. Everyone on this forum should be very familiar with the failings of human hearing and the power of expectations. There is a very good reason people won't just accept what you've heard without some verification.

What might sound fundamental to you, MG, does allude some people -- though there actually there are few here than some other sites I could mention.

It's still common to hear, "Trust your (own) ears". To be sure, it's better to trust your own ears than some other guy's, but even our own ears need verification. This is most certainly true when it comes to auditioning for smalll changes, including cables of all sorts, tubes, opamps, fancy fuses, and the numerous tweaks that are out there. If objective measures don't work one ought to look for a general consensus pertaining to a component -- on the other had too broad a consensus can be just a self-reenforcing pop trend.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that these items can't or don't make a difference, only that the differences are small and it is easy to delude ourselves regarding their efficacy. (The tweak category certainly includes the astonishing items purveyed by Machina Dynamic, (here) -- let me assure you people actually buy this stuff and insist it makes a difference. What away to earn a living though; why didn't we think of it?)

[StevenSurprenant]

First off, I'd like to comment on the hearing loss of the elderly (since it was brought up in a previous reply). For most, if not all, that is a fact of life. The real question is, "how does that affect a persons ability to hear". I don't have the answer to that question, but I can relate a story to you that sheds some light on it...

My mom, when she was about 70, had severe hearing loss and so bought hearing aids for both ears. She could still hear without them, but she was constantly complaining that she had trouble hearing people speak. She decided that the physical discomfort of wearing them wasn't worth it so she never used them. I suspect that her hearing loss was fairly advanced because she would watch TV with closed caption on. With that said... She came to visit me. I was watching a movie at the time and the sound was coming from my Quad ESL's. She sat on the couch and after about 10 minutes, remarked to me, "It sounds just like a movie theater, only a lot clearer!". Now think about that... "...only a lot clearer!" This statement came from a woman with pronounced hearing loss. How was this possible?

Apparently, the ability to hear transcends a persons ability to hear the full range of frequencies.

In case you were wondering... No, she wasn't wearing her hearing aids, and No, I wasn't playing the movie very loud.

[Feanor]

...
Apparently, the ability to hear transcends a persons ability to hear the full range of frequencies.
...

I believe this for sure. I'm pretty old, (66), but I've had limited high frequency hearing for at least a decade. On top of that, I experience continuous tinnitis.

I hear nothing about 10 kHz, stone deaf for the top octave. I've had relatively limited frequency range for a long time but I'm not sure how much for how long since I wasn't tested. As for the tinnitis, I've had that for over 40 years. It is continuous in both ears, but a little stronger in the left. It has gotten a little bit worse in recent years.

Notwithstanding these auditory handicaps, I can hear subtle differences in components. Well OK, I don't hear much difference in case of power cords.

[hifitommy]

fean,

i am one ytear older than you and do of course have high freq hearing loss but still can discern differences in components and wire. most of my wquip has captive power cables but one day, i intend to experiment with power cables as to sound diffs.

that will wait until i have iec equipped electronics. too many reviewers that i respect cant hear the diffs and i am open to the information when it presents itself to me in person. i have not been privy to demos of that type.

[Feanor]

fean,

i am one ytear older than you and do of course have high freq hearing loss but still can discern differences in components and wire. most of my wquip has captive power cables but one day, i intend to experiment with power cables as to sound diffs.

that will wait until i have iec equipped electronics. too many reviewers that i respect cant hear the diffs and i am open to the information when it presents itself to me in person. i have not been privy to demos of that type.

HFT, as I've allowed on many many occassions I'm a cable skeptic and intend to stay that way.

Again, I'm not saying that cables can't sound different, only that differences are typically very small, and that expensive cables don't represent good value for people (like me) with entry- to mid-level systems who would be better off putting the money towards better components.

[hifitommy]

hi fean,

i respect the skepticism, a also am wary of some things that dont seem to make sense such as premium power cables (pangea makes very affordable items).

the same for interconnects and speaker wire but once you hear the difference that talks to you, you figure out something.

the paint job on a chevy is more than adequate for most of us but the paint on a ferrari or lamborghini, or bentley is another ball of wax.

if you have read many of my posts related to this subject, you will see that i dont recommend that big dollars be spent here in this area UNLESS really big ones have been spent on the rest of the system. when someone has soulution electronics and magico speakers, ratshack wire just wont do.

i love getting great sound from low priced components and many of my pieces are cost effective in spades and some not.

my best wires were either won at the audio society meeting or i got for a song by being in the right place at the right time.