What did you do to your stereo rig today?

Clipdat

Yeah if they did they would've prevented three customers complaining about a noisy standby SMPS.

invalid

Clipdat wrote: »

Yeah if they did they would've prevented three customers complaining about a noisy standby SMPS.

Plus it would have sounded better. You were the one that bragged about how quiet it was on the linear power supply thread kind of funny.

Clipdat

It would've sounded better? I wasn't aware you've tried one in your system, when was that?

treitz3

This is worthy of another thread.

Are well built SMPS PS's noisier than a well built LPS or is it a cost associated, nose in the air placebo?

Tom

invalid

I've heard the benchmark in other systems, it's not bad, but always seems like something is missing, not my cup of tea.

jbreezy5

invalid wrote: »

I've heard the benchmark in other systems, it's not bad, but always seems like something is missing, not my cup of tea.

Maybe a LPS? J/k (or am I?; not even sure if I know 😅)

I actually wish I could A/B the node 2i stock vs. the LHY LPS upgrade. Tbh, I subjectively felt like imaging improved, but that transparency decreased; not sure I like that trade. I ❤️ transparency.

Since I can’t A/B can’t really reach a conclusion, hence why I haven’t done a review.

Unlike when I purchased an outboard LPS for the Dacmagic, the LHY LPS from my perception is not necessarily night/day better.

Clipdat

invalid wrote: »

I've heard the benchmark in other systems, it's not bad, but always seems like something is missing, not my cup of tea.

Some people find the complete lack of distortion to be unpleasant/uncomfortable or simply not enjoyable in some way (it does take a bit of time to acclimate to it), and quickly go back to traditional solid state A/AB or tube amplification. It is what it is.

invalid

Clipdat wrote: »

invalid wrote: »

I've heard the benchmark in other systems, it's not bad, but always seems like something is missing, not my cup of tea.

Some people find the complete lack of distortion to be unpleasant/uncomfortable or simply not enjoyable in some way (it does take a bit of time to acclimate to it), and quickly go back to traditional solid state A/AB or tube amplification. It is what it is.

There is no such thing as lack of distortion in an audio system, the speakers have the most distortion. Measurements are not as important as you think. we do not measure devices in the working conditions they are used, and we do not need a human weighting standard.

Clipdat

I was talking about the distortion profile of the amplifier, and you know that.

But yeah by all means go off on a nonsensical tangent about how measurements aren't as important as I think they are and blah blah blah.

You're impossible to have a rational intelligent discussion with. * B o z o L i s t ' d *

invalid

What I said is true, there is no agreed upon weighting standard, and we do not measure equipment in the working conditions they are used. Measurements are fine, but designers wouldn't even have to do listening evaluations if all that was needed is measurements.

jbreezy5

invalid wrote: »

What I said is true, there is no agreed upon weighting standard, and we do not measure equipment in the working conditions they are used. Measurements are fine, but designers wouldn't even have to do listening evaluations if all that was needed is measurements.

That’s my issue with so many audiophiles (not aiming what I’m about to say at you, but speaking to the thought paradigm)…

Some say it’s all subjective, ignoring the fact that manufacturers do measure their equipment, and certain measurements clearly affect what is audible to most listeners…

Others say measurements are all that matters, and any perception that hasn’t been measured can’t be heard.

Why are so many black/white minded about this?

treitz3

I have no idea. Those that rely on measurements only are a laughable crowd (to me). The statement in bold below used to be part of my signature;

~ Not all things that can be measured can be heard and not all things heard can be measured ~

Measurements are overrated IMO and can't tell you how the perception of imaging is changed, it can't offer any information on height, depth or other locational cues of the reproductive effort. Measurements can't tell you how the perception of space or the size of venue is observed/perceived to the listener. They are and can be a very useful tool for those who are not intimately familiar with frequencies, nodes and the like and how they affect the end result as to what hits your ears but along my audio journey, that's it. It's a guide. A useful one but one that has its limits.

I built my system guided by my ear, tuned it by ear, adjusted everything by ear and while I may not have achieved perfection (I never will), I damned sure have exceeded excellence.

Our esteemed member, @heiney9 has a quote by Nelson Pass in his signature that really puts a nice focus on this.

"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".

It's like the measurement crowd needs confirmation bias to prove to them that something sounds good. That's why I stated that they are a laughable crowd.

Tom

VR3

I think measurements are important to verify a manufacture is putting out what it says it is putting out.

To base purchase decisions based solely on measurements makes little sense to me

rebelsoul

I am running two ifi power x ,one for cable box and one for router. They say there supposed to be 20 times quieter then lps.

jbreezy5

treitz3 wrote: »

I have no idea. Those that rely on measurements only are a laughable crowd (to me). The statement in bold below used to be part of my signature;

~ Not all things that can be measured can be heard and not all things heard can be measured ~

Measurements are overrated IMO and can't tell you how the perception of imaging is changed, it can't offer any information on height, depth or other locational cues of the reproductive effort. Measurements can't tell you how the perception of space or the size of venue is observed/perceived to the listener. They are and can be a very useful tool for those who are not intimately familiar with frequencies, nodes and the like and how they affect the end result as to what hits your ears but along my audio journey, that's it. It's a guide. A useful one but one that has its limits.

I built my system guided by my ear, tuned it by ear, adjusted everything by ear and while I may not have achieved perfection (I never will), I damned sure have exceeded excellence.

Our esteemed member, @heiney9 has a quote by Nelson Pass in his signature that really puts a nice focus on this.

"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".

It's like the measurement crowd needs confirmation bias to prove to them that something sounds good. That's why I stated that they are a laughable crowd.

Tom

VR3 wrote: »

I think measurements are important to verify a manufacture is putting out what it says it is putting out.

To base purchase decisions based solely on measurements makes little sense to me

My contention is that there is value to be found in both measurementsand subjective listening experiences.

The laughable crowds (to me) are those who land in either extreme. Polarized views don’t make any sense to me in this regard.

It often seems that moderates are few in this hobby.

invalid

Of course measurements matter, but there is still a big gap between what we can hear and what we can measure.

jbreezy5

invalid wrote: »

Of course measurements matter, but there is still a big gap between what we can hear and what we can measure.

Depends…

invalid

Depends on what?

jbreezy5

invalid wrote: »

Depends on what?

Depends on whether what is being measured relates directly to that which may be heard.

For example, Frequency response variations are audible. The interaction between tube amplification and speaker impedance typically results in these types of variations and may be perceived by human hearing.

This has often been cited by John Atkinson @ Stereophile in tube amplifier reviews, as well as, speaker reviews.

It’s the same reason that modern surround receivers include room correction.
_____

On the other hand, consensus among persons whom perform measurements seems to be that THD% measurements are far less audible , and chasing infinitesimal THD% isn’t a meaningful exercise.

invalid

I agree with what you say about most tube amplifiers, but there are exceptions to that rule, there are quite a few systems that have low impedance speakers that a few tube amplifiers had better bass than big powerful solid state amps. I've heard a few apogee speakers with tube amps that had better bass than my krell amp with my Apogees.

jbreezy5

invalid wrote: »

I agree with what you say about most tube amplifiers, but there are exceptions to that rule, there are quite a few systems that have low impedance speakers that a few tube amplifiers had better bass than big powerful solid state amps. I've heard a few apogee speakers with tube amps that had better bass than my krell amp with my Apogees.

Well, I didn’t claim better or worse bass. I only said that frequency response variations are audible, as well as, measurable.

VR3

Plugged one of these up

Unknown

This content has been removed.

VR3

Si! 335 model, so far sounds excellent at low volumes

engie490

VR3 wrote: »

Si! 335 model, so far sounds excellent at low volumes

That's a beast! Did the 334-336 have the same capacitor problem as the 331-333?

VR3

From my research, not that I'm aware of

Unknown

This content has been removed.

VR3

Rare photo op

xschop

Installed focus rings in my 8TL's midwoofers and thoroughly tested a pair in one channel. Then phase-plugged them and tested again. Got excited about modding these jewels again...

xschop

engie490 wrote: »

I picked up a pair of Unity Audio Pyramid Signature Fountainhead speakers for $200. One mid had separated from the surround. Spent $50 on getting that professionally repaired. So $250 investment for speakers that went for $5600 in the late 90s.

These are the ones with cabinets made of corian. Apparently that wasn’t dense enough, because they also have the Microscan devices on the back of each.

These were very filthy when I got them, so I had to clean lots of dirt/dust from the drivers and cabs. The microscan devices I put in the dishwasher and they came out great.

The genius that I purchased these from decided to get a picture of the bass driver in the bottom of one of the speakers, so he flipped it upside down on his driveway. You can see what happened to the top of the cabinet.






Now have them in the main rig. Wow do they sound good! Wide, deep soundstage. Lovely tone. Bass is really good and plentiful. Tone is beautiful. In other words, very musical.

Are those Audax tweeters? Unique looking speakers there.