Upgraded to Audio Note J - and other musings.

[RGA]

Tube amps in Asian countires never left never got left behind and are hugely popular. The reason is thatthe following technology, SS, didn't sound as good to them -- simple concept.

America is the disposable society - people are not buying products for their quality or build construction - otherwise HTiB would not outsell everything else. As big as Bryston or Rotel are they are nothing compared ot the inferior junk Sony and their ilk is putting out.

There is only one reason to put it - profit. Has nothing to do with technological superiority. And your point is ludicrous because ALL speakers have a cost to final price ratio - why for example you pick on Audio Note cost of drivers to final price - what about the Paradigm Studio 100 or B&W N801 or $70,000.00US Dynaudio Evidence Master - It's not like the Drivers combined are worth $1000.00 - they may sell then for more than that but Dynaudio may build them for $3.50 each.

Audio Note relies on the cabinetry to creat a large section of the resulting sound. And as for their amplifiers - well they use the best physical parts in the world for their amplifiers - How does Krell, which you recommended way back, do to justify their price in a world where SS "SHOULD BE" dirt cheap. $80,000.US for two monoblock power amplifiers?

High watt amps only came out because speaker manufacturers cheaped out and made low efficiency loudspeaker - better to high damp bad cheap wood than build with quality cabinetry with no internal voids - but this would COST more and reduce profits - much cheaper to use the worst wood and stuff it to death with Foam or dacron or whatever - or sand fill them. Then you need a 100+ watts to open them up because the driver is competing with the cabinet.

Then you need more BIG drivers to get bass that one 8 inch woofer properly designed can not only do but provide DEEPER bass and clearer sound top to bottom.

For a DIY you can build them dirt cheap - labour is the highest price part for small companies especially when that labour is from Britain - and when you have a 100% sampling for QC that adds to the cost. You have the option to bypass all of this. At least they have the option. Same with the amps - you want the best Audio Note transformer fine you want a cheap ass one that is fine too.

Audio equipment is not the same as a car - more parts in an audio chain is worse unless it serves a purpose. AN is about the direct route as possible from source to speaker with no error correction of any kind - or as close to this as possible - done badly it is a disaster - done right it does not and cannot get better - no need to FIX errors with oversampling if your player does not make them in the first place.

This comes at the price of power OK...but even power is only there to compensate for ineficient insenstive design - it is also AN ERROR correcting entity.

I choose the system that needs the least error correcting. And those errors were only created because the manufacturers used CHEAP parts.

[RGA]

And also these tube/transistor debates are silly anyway - I tend to agree with this reviewer Ian White

"While I prefer the sound of tubes to solid-state devices, I refuse to throw myself into the ludicrous "push-pull/single-ended" debate. I see no point to it. Does it really matter to you the reader if the amp that makes the most beautiful music in your home uses tubes or transistors? I believe that this exercise is about finding the amplifier that sounds the best to your ears in the context of your system. Some of you will choose solid state and others will choose tubes. It’s the end result that matters." http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/ian04.htm

[skeptic]

"How does Krell, which you recommended way back, do to justify their price in a world where SS "SHOULD BE" dirt cheap. $80,000.US for two monoblock power amplifiers?"

I don't ever recall recommending Krell. IMO, there is no justification for a pricetag of $80,000 for a pair of Krell monoblock amplfiers. There is no justification for even $8000.

You parrot back Peter Qtwerp's line very well but you are both very wrong about low efficiency loudspeakers. AR3, probably the archetype acoustic suspension loudspeaker was among the least efficient speakers of its day requiring a whopping 25 watts RMS per channel and having a rated maximum capacity of 100. That was a lot in the early to mid 1960s. It was extremely well constructed of very good materials for their day as were products from KLH.

I don't know much about the Asian market but I would find it hard to belive that Panasonic, Sony, Kenwood, Pioneer, Teac, Toshiba, Nakamichi, Yamaha, Denon, didn't fill that market with ss products as successfully as they filled the American market. It is dangerous to generalize about America being a "throw-away" society. Just look at how much vintage equipment is still available on e-bay for instance that wasn't thrown away and how much more is likely still out there being used. Some of them are considered gems and are highly prized like old McIntosh and Marantz equipment.

High wattage amps came out because the market wanted them and they could be made at reasonable cost using transistors. The first on the consumer market was the Crown DC300 with Phase Linear 400 and 700 following shortly. There was a horsepower race of sorts in the 1970s and McIntosh and Marantz entered the fray as well.

The fiberglass in acoustic suspension loudspeakers is used to damp the speaker. Damping is a fundimental part of tuning the speaker/enclosure combination to avoid spurious resonances and is an inherent part of Newton's second law of motion. If you design speaker systems, you neglect it at your own peril. It is hard if not impossible to say much about Peter Qtwerps speakers or any of his other products for that matter except that they seem expensive and it doesn't appear that much goes into them. He doesn't tell you much about the design and there aren't many places to go hear them, certainly not near where I live and I'm not going out of my way to get to one of the few places that they are demonstrated.

It's always suspicious when someone comes here with the line that only one guy has a corner on everything that is good and everything different from his meaning everything else is awful. By your reckoning, the more than 99% of audiophiles who don't have any AN equipment all have terrible equipment that isn't worth listening to. I'm sure most people find this line hard to swallow. I know I do.