4krow

I had a tube preamp once that had so many options for the available tubes themselves, and then different options for how those tubes were operated. I found myself switching back and forth often, ending in me just selling it to someone else to have a toy. It seems right to have a unit that does every possible thing to the music, with endless choices. I prefer a unit that is straightforward.

That sounds like another challenge altogether. I am not so sure if the Digital Time Lens is as useful as it was when CD's first came out. Don't worry, there are plenty of recordings even today that could benefit from it. Just tonight, I dared to listen to Super Tramps 'Breakfast in America'. Great music, NASTY peaky and harsh CD recording. The album was so much better. The other two circuits I have no experience with.

Fortunately, there are a variety of small tubes out there to use if space were an issue. I forget the number, but Vincent used small, and i mean small tubes in some of their equipment. Then of course, for those that know me, The Korg SP1 is quite the DHT choice to use. So many of my customers are very surprised by its full sound. Honestly though I wonder if the need for a tube buffer is necessary. I would see a case for having a switch for in or out of circuit here. Of course, same with the Gundry. I am not a big fan of this circuit but I can say that there are those cases where it has a use. I do agree with making some changes in the new model, and I really like the idea that the chassis would be bigger as it would make fitting all the other stuff in much easier. FWIW, the second iteration of the C-9 way back in the day had bolt on rack handles that could be added to the chassis, but I have never, ever seen any.

I had a Black Ice Audio unit designed by 'whats his name' famous guy oh yah Jim Fosgate. It had some of the same ideas of the C-9 and as I have already mentioned a variable control for the hologram effect. It wasn't called that, I believe that it was a soundstage enhancer. The reason I am so adamant about this idea is because I was surprise at just how little that I have to turn the knob to get effect. Turned the other way past the center point detent, the sound stage would start to narrow. Interesting. Yes, it is an apples and oranges comparison to some degree but the variable control is what sold me. It also had a tube buffer, and for some reason bass adjustment was also variable. Most people liked it but I didn't use that part. FWIW, I still preferred the C9. That was not much of a surprise as I have heard other units of this type and the C9 is the clear winner.

Fortunately, tubes can also be mounted on their side.

I have always wanted to see a variable amount of hologram rather than a pushbutton on/off type of affair. Yes, I would probably buy one!

Glad your here. We need troops.

Ok, now you have obligated yourself to post photos.

I really don't like when I hear somebody say something and when I tell them what I heard they say, "I didn't say that". That is when I wish I had a tape recorder to playback to them. Like the last time that I was at the dentist, and he said, "Ready? OK! On three!".

Let me just say this. Recently, I decided to go outside my wheelhouse of musical taste by buying a few recordings that I wouldn't have bothered with normally. These included BTO (an 8 CD remix of their albums), Michael Jacksons thriller which is a great recording for most of the album, Cher Gold, which made me feel like barfing, having been heaved so far back into the 60's. It was the style drum music rhythm popular in that day that got to me most, plus the fact that on these recordings, I really never heard Cher voice that well. Fortunately, I got CSN put out by Mobil Fidelity (I'm surprised that they didn't claim that the CD was recorded off a one step process 78 album). But the winner is easily Crosby Still and Nash. Great music and the recording too. Michael Jackson's Thriller came in second because I like a few songs on the album and the recording is reliably good. All the others were something that I would trade off in moments notice. And that is what I have been listening to.

Example: Test Post (I chose a larger file, so maybe something small is better for test).

Fortunately, I have not had the trouble that you describe but can relate. One other site that I visit is next to impossible for me to navigate photos to. Anyway, Perhaps you can try a 'test post' by typing just that, and attach a 200kb or so to it. This should be able to be resolved.

AJ, Here is a question for you. Even though music is being played in pitch, does it ever sound flat to you? This is something that I often hear, and really wonder what the truth of it all is. Not just on my system, but when the organ in church is playing it sounds flat, and sometimes pace is slow as well. Yes, many church organists play as if it were funeral, and a few of them with liven the tempo which might be a relief, should the piece intended it. Look at Hyden's Clock Symphony. Sometimes played as a grandfather clock (my preference) and other times played as a pocket watch.

Brian, I sure wasn't getting excited about this possibility after seeing what we have done so far concerning hearing loss. And yes, I can be a poster child for how screwed up our sense of hearing can get. No doubt, if the ear doesn't get it right to begin with, you may be dead in the water, but unfortunately for me, there is much more. I will just say that there is a link between the two halves of the brain (at least how an audiologist told me) for sound/speech recognition. If that is impaired in some way, the sound may be there but the brain doesn't 'get it'. It is not translated well. God, can I ever relate to this! When I was young, my sense of hearing was incredible, but my speech recognization has always been horrible. So, when everyone else loved an album for the lyrics, I loved it for the music, and music only. In fact, music is the one thing that I still understand fairly well. Speech in most cases is becoming useless for me, and I seem to explain this multiple times per day in public (twice today, so far). I want to know more about all of this even if it doesn't help my situation.

Just got done biasing my amp this morning and wasn't surprised to see that biasing one tube affects another. Something to keep in mind.

Well crap, why are lashings still illegal? It would straighten some up out there. I am pretty tired of being ripped off seemingly anytime I choose to trust audiophile "common sense".

So, that's good, right?

Crap! Just when I thought we might have something worthwhile for digital audio.

Since my tuner is in the basement, I finally did the work and installed an antenna in the attic. Tuned it a bit by placement and have had great reception ever since. The cheezie jobs that you can buy in all kinds of price ranges will not get you what you want as well as an elevated antenna. That is my experience out here on the prairie.

I rely on science as a start, and then listen with my being as an end result for what I prefer.

AJ, In my case, I use the external Red Dragonfly as a DAC, and then feed that through the preamp or headphones. You bet. The computer wasn't made for what I am doing with it. So a LOT is bypassed. Windows OS isn't on If I understand what the original wizard did to it. Anyway, CD's are ripped bit perfect and then loaded to a FLAC file. The AudioQuest Red takes it from there. This is an old Lenovo Think Pad. FWIW, I also have an AudioQuest 'Jitterbug' in line with the Red Dragonfly. Don't know that this is really needed but it's there. I tend to run the computer from its battery, but that probably doesn't really mean much. Headphones sound amazing, at least the Hi-Fi Man 400S does. When I feed the signal to my audio system, the sound is 'perfect' as I have ever had it. Really pretty shocking to me after all the horrible ('New and Improved!') stuff that I have heard up till now.

After a few minutes, I totally get the point about these new PS Audio products. I still cling to the idea of the original product which was in fact a regenerator. Not efficient, true that, but very effective. A bit later I bought the new model which was sooo much more efficient, and a total PITA! Had to send it back to PS Audio for instability reasons. I won't even go into al of the crap that this unit produced, even when in the middle of the night, would come on all by itself, etc. Done baby done. I have owned other older PSA products and the only one that I would keep is the original P300, which regenerates, produces multi-waveforms if you want, and supplies balanced power. There, end of story for me. It seemed that every single product after that sucked in one way or another. FWIW, the P300 can be 'upgraded' with better caps and even power transistors if your into that sort of thing. What I saw as a downside though is that some power transformers don't like to be messed with, causing mechanical hum. Point well taken. Or I guess, use with caution. Because I love to mess around with power doesn't apply to most people. To me, the P300 is unequalled, but not for everybody. Done.

I'm talking out of turn, I know. For whatever reason, the best sound that I have ever heard has been from a laptop. It beats all for reasons that I don't even care to understand. So really, when I rip a CD to this laptop and then save it as a FLAC file, I'm done. It does NOT make sense but what do I care? Most of the process for me is easy (very important!), except finding it in the mess of files that I have made. Still in spite of this fact, I prefer to spin one kind of disc or another. Ultimately, I suppose that an all in one sort of box is where I'm headed, but not for the prices demanded at this time.