|
Post by username on May 11, 2006 16:22:16 GMT -7
ok, I've had my Maz 28 reverb 1-12 combo now for a couple of months... and the tone of this amp just keeps on keepin on... someone posted on this forum that they thought the amp gets better with age because it "settles" in.. the poster also said he never heard of that before.. now I understand the speakers have a break in period....but I just think maybe the Dr Z amps are different animals when it come to boutique amps or any amps.... maybe he's right about the 'settling in' I don't know.. but, whatever the good Doctor's formula is...Brother, I'm sold! I'm not a pro musician....just a regular Joe that likes to play whenever I can... I have the advantage of living out in the country..my closes neighbor is a half mile away... so I can really crank!! that amp at anytime of the day.. now, I'm fairly new when it comes to all of this.. but, I'll tell you what kind of tubes I put into that Maz 38 that just has enormous clean tone for the PRS that I'm using right now.. These tube locations might not be right for most here.. but to my ears.....the tone is huge and clean..bottom end..unbelievable! It took me awhile of swapping, here's what I ended up with...huge!! clean tone!!...at lower or cranked volumes BTW:got the tubes from Mike Kropotkin..excellent service V1.. NOS JAN GE 5751 (Balanced) ..I had it in V5..and V2..to my ear this spot is better..and it sounded better "to me" in V1 then the none balanced 5751...sounded better to me than most 12AX7.."at this time"..it could change.. V2.. NOS JAN GE 5751 Blackplate V3.. the China 12AT7 that came with the amp..and I tried a few different tubes there..even a NOS Mullard CV4024/ECC81/12AT7 ..the stock tube sounded better.."to me" V4.. Tung Sol Reissue 12AX7 ..not a 100% sure on this one there but, its pretty good..alittle gainey maybe...not sure if that would make a difference in that spot.. V5.. Sovtek 12AX7LPS..the stock tube that came with the amp...I tried all the 5751's there, but they ended up in V1 and V2.. I also tried a NOS JAN 5AR4..but again to my ear the stock 5AR4 that came with the amp "seemed" better to me... just my 2 cents gents...these amps are amazing animals..thank you Doctor
|
|
|
Post by fishman on May 11, 2006 18:46:13 GMT -7
For what its worth, both of my Z's "settled" in, the 'Ray more so than the MAZ....but very noticeable on both...and I am not sure if they are done yet! Never had this happen on any other amps to this extent...don;t know what it is, but it is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by username on May 11, 2006 21:50:37 GMT -7
fishman...yes,
don't know what it is exactly, but it is a good thing...amazing amps
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 12, 2006 10:30:39 GMT -7
In high end audio this is a very common theme. Most of those manufacturers recommend a "burn in" period. I've seen this with amps, pre-amps, CD players & even cables.
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 12, 2006 11:05:53 GMT -7
In high end audio this is a very common theme. Most of those manufacturers recommend a "burn in" period. I've seen this with amps, pre-amps, CD players & even cables. Cork sniffers ;D I'll look for the link to the audiophool company that recommends letting their cables "break in" for the best sound. Of course, the cables cost hundreds of dollars per foot. I'd bet my next paycheck that those guys couldn't hear the difference between one of those fancy cables and a piece of lamp cord. But yes, speakers do sound different after a break in period. Speakers are mechanical devices with parts that wear (unlike a piece of wire) and will "break in". I have also noticed that when you run a Maz hard and loud for 4-5 hours that the low end will lose a little of the tightness and it will compress and distort a little more, even with the little colling fan blowing. Heat can change tone. Also, as your ears get fatigued the tone will appear different. But I don't know about letting the cables settle in.
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 15, 2006 7:43:51 GMT -7
In high end audio this is a very common theme. Most of those manufacturers recommend a "burn in" period. I've seen this with amps, pre-amps, CD players & even cables. Cork sniffers ;D I'll look for the link to the audiophool company that recommends letting their cables "break in" for the best sound. Of course, the cables cost hundreds of dollars per foot. I'd bet my next paycheck that those guys couldn't hear the difference between one of those fancy cables and a piece of lamp cord. But yes, speakers do sound different after a break in period. Speakers are mechanical devices with parts that wear (unlike a piece of wire) and will "break in". I have also noticed that when you run a Maz hard and loud for 4-5 hours that the low end will lose a little of the tightness and it will compress and distort a little more, even with the little colling fan blowing. Heat can change tone. Also, as your ears get fatigued the tone will appear different. But I don't know about letting the cables settle in. I couldn't disagree with you more Odin. I am an "audiophool" and have been for the past 35 years. I know there is allot of snake oil being sold, but there are also many legit products. Cables do have their own sonic signature and I have heard it countless times on my system. I have also done blind listening test with friends and family and they have been able to discern subtle to major differences between components & cables. You must take into account the playback system being used. If you are playing back your fav CD through a $50.00 RCA DVD into a $99.00 Sony receiver out to $150.00 Infinity speakers, you may not be able to hear a difference between the best and worse cables made. If, on the other hand, you are using Mark Levinson electronics into Martin Logan electrostatic speakers, anyone with half an ear can hear sonic differences between good and bad speaker cables and interconnects. BTW, I don't own any Levinson or Martin Logan gear. I'm just using that as an example. I don't claim that more expensive gear is always better, but manufacturers have an idea of their products capabilities and price it accordingly. We need to use our ears to judge the products merits. If buying gear to get closer to "live" sound in the living room is cork sniffing, then any of us buying Dr. Z amps to squeeze that last bit of tone from our guitars are by definition cork sniffers too! I'm proud to be a cork sniffin' cork sniffer! ;D
|
|
|
Post by anacephalic on May 15, 2006 8:07:42 GMT -7
hey guitarman. i be another of those audiophools. I've even heard differences in power cords but i refuse to enter that game. A lot of guys spend more time listening to cables than music. I got some nice balanced middle of the road cables and left it at that. Minor set up tweaks are more rewarding and free. what kind of gear do you use?
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 15, 2006 8:15:55 GMT -7
My comment was aimed at those who claim that their $1000 speaker cable needs to "settle in" before it sounds best. That's unmitigated bullsh*t. Sure, there's a difference between cheap equipment and high end equipment, but the "audiophile" crowd sometimes takes it to ludicrous extremes. Case in point, these speaker cables. $31,500 for an 8' speaker cable. www.transparentcable.com/news/pdf_files/expensive_technology_OpusMM.pdfThink it sounds any better than a $15 8' section of 12 gauge oxygen-free copper speaker cable from Radio Shack? Put it this way...for $31,500 I could have someone killed, buy a new car, and still have money left over for dinner. Or I could buy an 8' speaker cable.
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 15, 2006 10:14:00 GMT -7
How about a gold chassis Alesandro amp for $45,000? The problem is with guitar cords you can achieve a large percentage of the differences you notice by turning the tone controls on the amp a little bit, up or down to match the difference you hear. High end stereo gear is full of super tweakers. I'm okay with that, they're fussy with that and I'm fussy with guitars and amps. Everybody needs a little obsession. I subscribed to Stereophile Magazine for many years and finally let it lapse. I didn't have as much expendable income as I used to and didn't feel the need to keep current. I always bought the affordable class C components, JoLida tube amp/preamp, Vandersteen 2c speakers and Cal Audio CD player. Class C is good enough for me! I never went for the high dollar speaker and interconnect cables, just moderatley priced wires that the local boutiques recommend.
|
|
|
Post by anacephalic on May 15, 2006 10:36:46 GMT -7
I'm with you on that transparent stuff Oldin. I did hear a system with those cables in it...probably $250k for the whole system including the room, which is the single most important component in a system like that...and it sounded great but i wouldn't trade my house for it. There are guys out there that expect power cords to break in.
The only thing breakin in on cables are ears getting used to the sound made by their new cables which they need to claim break in because they don't like the sound at first and need to justify the expenditure. The only thing i think has serious break in effect is the speakers.
My whole rig is wired with Ox free copper (except the CD which has a combo of copper and silver) from harmonic tech. cheap (relatively) and effective. As an example of how cables do have distinct effect in a system as a whole the silver/copper cables were way too harsh and bright until i figured out vibration dampning under the CD. Clearly audible and reversible..take the dampning out and it sounds like crap put it in and it's wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 15, 2006 12:18:52 GMT -7
hey guitarman. i be another of those audiophools. I've even heard differences in power cords but i refuse to enter that game. A lot of guys spend more time listening to cables than music. I got some nice balanced middle of the road cables and left it at that. Minor set up tweaks are more rewarding and free. what kind of gear do you use? Speakers are Vandersteen 3A Signatures. Power Amp is Aragon 8008 Dual Mono Pre-amp is Adcom GFP-750 CD Player is Arcam CD36 Interconnects are Harmonic Technology Truth Links Speaker cables Tara Labs
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 15, 2006 12:27:40 GMT -7
Another Vandersteen owner, right on! I've got an older Adcom, 450 I think, preamp that I used to use with a pair of Boothroyd-Stewart 100 watt monoblocks. The B-R preamp that came with the Monoblocks doesn't have a CD compatible input. After I got the JoLida integrated amp I put that stuff away. I could sell it but used stereo gear doesn't seem to have much value and most people wouldn't know that B-R later became Meridian.
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 15, 2006 12:28:11 GMT -7
We went way off thread!!!!!!!! Sorry, Man!
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 15, 2006 14:14:21 GMT -7
There are guys out there that expect power cords to break in. Thanks for that, I actually laughed out loud just thinking about it. You know what they say about a fool and his money. The only thing breakin in on cables are ears getting used to the sound made by their new cables which they need to claim break in because they don't like the sound at first and need to justify the expenditure. The only thing i think has serious break in effect is the speakers. You just hit the nail squarely on the head on all 3 accounts.
|
|
|
Post by Telemanic on May 15, 2006 16:44:33 GMT -7
well, probably in the audiophile world more than any other, is the law of diminishing returns. It exsists in many fields, but th e most prevelant here. For instance, a $1500.00 sound system, sounds CLEARLY much better than a $199.00 system from walmart. Huge improvement! But spend $2500.00 on a system,....Improvement,... sure, but the ratio of improvement per $$'s goes down. And so on and so on. At a point your going to see that a $50,000.00 system does not sound twice as good as a $25,000.00 one. This is the law of diminishing returns. Does the 50K system sound better?....probably, but is it worth 2x the cost. And the other factor is would everybody hear the difference? Maybe not. Just like us in our amp field, listening is a thing that is developed over years of experience. There are subtlety's of tone that a novice will not pick up. I'm sure youve all been around that annoying wine taster guy, whos going," yes,.. this one has a nice nose of violets and raisins, blah blah blah. And you think, man id like to knock this guy out. But ya know what, a somalier (professional wine selector), can taste a wine and tell you what kind of grape, where it was grown, and what vintage it is !!! Admitidly these are rare, there are not many in the world at that level, but the point is that there are some who have a VERY refined and edjucated ability to distinguish subtle differences. So, to relate that to the audio you can see that there are people that can and do distinguish VERY subtle differences in sound qualities. I personally have about $20.00 a foot cables on my nice but very average system, and yes they EASILY sound better than monster cables, but that is about as far as i go, personally. I do not see the need to spend $30,000.00 on cables. Do they sound better than a 5k set, i bet they do, but again, the law!! I'm not going to ridicule someone who has the means, and gets off on seeing how far they can push the sound repro envelope, no more than i would someone who HAD to have a dumble for 15K. Whatever floats yer boat man. As far as copper, electricity is a funny thing. I have heard of cables settling in or whatever. I do know that all copper wire, oxygen free or not is not the same. As it is drawn thru the die, a grain is created, and the more perfect the surface the more intact the sound, clarity, balance, distortion, sound stage, time alingment, etc. That requires technology, and expertise. Because there is not a large market for such, the cost at that level is HIGH. I dont think it a scam, it just is what it is. Cables are directional, in isolation, i can hear the difference in my guitar cables end to end. Cant hear it on a noisy stage tho, so its a little isoteric. Id be willing to bet someone in the field of drawing high end wire could speak to the possibility of the copper grain structure aging in or whatever. The bottom line is that we all have are own limitations on abilities and sensabilities, and i for one am going to stay away from laughing at the guy who has to have a dumble, when he'd probably sound just as good playing a Fuchs ( or a Z !! ) for $12,500.00 less!
|
|
|
Post by username on May 15, 2006 18:11:20 GMT -7
That's the beauty of this Z forum I think...
certain threads start out one way or another ..
and ends up with all kinds of interesting information from other knowledgeable posters here...
Z Talk is one of the best forums around....imo
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 15, 2006 21:44:52 GMT -7
I do not see the need to spend $30,000.00 on cables. Do they sound better than a 5k set, i bet they do, but again, the law!! I'm not going to ridicule someone who has the means, and gets off on seeing how far they can push the sound repro envelope... Well I am going to laugh at him. C'mon.."sound repro"? Just what sound are we trying to reproduce here? A lot of the records that these "audiophiles" are trying to reproduce were recorded on analog equipment using a $200 assembly line instrument. How can you tell when you've stopped reproducing the original sound and started adding color to the sound that wasn't there. Besides, for $250K I can get the artist to perfrom in my living room, thereby trumping any fancy schmancy audiophile system for accurate reproduction. I firmly believe that the guys who are spending $30K on speaker cables are fools in pursuit of a non-existant sonic nirvana, and they tell themselves that they hear the sonic improvements to justify their expenditures. If you can show me a scientificaly accepted double blind test using audiophiles are the subjects, where the audiphiles can distinguish the difference between a lamp cord, a $50 cable and a $30K cable then maybe I'll believe it. And I want them to accurately and reliably not only distinguish that a difference exists, but articulate what the difference is and which one sounds "best". My money is on someone mistaking a hunk of brown lamp cord connected with wire nuts for a $30K cable made from pure unobtanium and connected to the speaker by the silk gloved hand of a virgin. Too much money makes people do things that defy logic. $30K speaker wires are the proof of this rule, not an exception to it. The emperor has no clothes.
|
|
|
Post by JASON (aka jgleaton) on May 15, 2006 22:35:25 GMT -7
Besides, for $250K I can get the artist to perfrom in my living room, thereby trumping any fancy schmancy audiophile system for accurate reproduction. ....made from pure unobtanium and connected to the speaker by the silk gloved hand of a virgin. Man, Odin... I just fell outta my chair Laughing.... " for 250K I can get the artist to perform in my living room..." thats funny... cause I Just got a a visual image of those commercials where someone like "Seal" is sitting in the Fans lap...singing one of his songs... maybe that's really going on... the ultimate HI FI experience! I hope you guy's keep a level head about this and are cool in regards to each other... and agree to disagree... cause I enjoyed reading both sides... I myself am somewhere in the middle I guess and Unobtanium... THATS just too funny, man.... Unobtanium must be to Bill Gates what Kryptonite is to Superman? " the unobtanium crystals Kan't take much moore captain!"" Highly illogical... The Captain has already beamed down to the planets surface, therefore I must assume there ARE NO VIRGINS left in this episode to plug in the speaker... However we do have an abudance of Silk." BTW-I'm gonna rename my band the " Cork Sniffers" ;D ( sorry for the silliness... I had a real bad day, came home and read the forum and I feel better now... really needed to laugh a little)
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 16, 2006 8:44:52 GMT -7
It's all an income thing. If $30K doesn't seem like much money to you then buy it, just don't expect any resale. A $30K car would have more resale value. No matter how much a guy spends on his stereo he's still only reproducing the recording, not the actual performance. I think that after you spend $5K on a system it costs a whole lot more for any incremental improvement (as pointed out above). So a rational person says "that's good enough" and stops there. I don't think you could say these guys are rational, at least from a normal working Joe's point of view but if he's making $500K a year then it ain't no thing to him. Circular discussion.
|
|
|
Post by anacephalic on May 16, 2006 8:47:59 GMT -7
looks like a tangent...might as well keep on it
Billy, guitarman i used to be another vandy owner and lover (lived with some 1-Bs for about 20 yrs) but when i went for the upgrade i discovered Dunlavy speakers before the old guy retired. I'd love to get some Vandy Vs but too much money for me. Both the Dunlavys and the Vandys use time alignment and phase considerations in their designs (i think theil is another one) so they have a similar sonic flavor and attention to accuracy.
current rig is
VTL 185 mono blocks with a 5.5 pre amp. recently retubed with Winged C 6550s in the power amps with NOS mullard 12AX7 and 12AT7s everywhere they were needed. Audio Research CD-2 Dunlavy Athenas CJ walker table with a LInn Basik arm using an old B&O reciever for phono pre and tuner Harmonic technology truthlinks with a HT pro silway II between the pre and the CD and HT Pro 9 biwire speaker cables
kind of a stupid money system but i took advantage of the audiophile habit of trading stuff all the time and got it for about half price or less on the net. Funny thing the guy i got the amps and pre from (lived in NC) had a pair of athenas he sold to a guy in Georgia. turns out i ended up finding those same speakers for sale a few months after i bought the amps...looks like karma destined them to be together...electronic true love!.
I got involved in a discussion on Audio gon about the possibility of accurately reproducing a live preformance on a home system and when you consider the interactions between the instruments, the PA and the room all in real time there is no way to expect to reproduce that from some studio engineed work, or even a board dump. Take the sonic interaction (wave addition and subtraction and phase cancelations etc on a grand scale) out of the picture and you have a recording. It's all that stage chaos that keeps me from chasing guitar cables and the detail stuff. the big sonic picture from my amp, and hopefully my hands, is all i can expect to get through to the audience so that is all i'm focussing on . I also look to gett an inspirational sound and feel out of my amp for my benifit but again that is big picture stuff. With a little more help from jason and the rest of you (thanks all!!) my Rx is gettin closer to Nirvana.
that $250k system was getting pretty close to the best reproduction possible. I was listening to solo upright bass and for the first time i really understood what was ment when the reviewer says the system gave an accurate representation of the the room the player was in...i mean you could really imagine where the walls in the recording venue were. i was kind of bummed about my system when i left but after about 10 minutes of listening to my rig and thinking that the quarter mil would only get maybe 10% more ...and you have to have the room for it, in my space i bet the tall dollare system wouldn't sound much different than my rig....i went back to being perfectly happy. The one thing to keep in mind is system balance is key not how much the system cost, much like finding the right tube, speaker, DR z combo to make every thing perfect FOR YOU. My system has smoked $90k systems, at least to my ears.
All the tweaking of stereos is just about finding the perfect coloration. I've found that there are reproducable sonic differences between cables and even using different vibration dampnining under components because changing the resonances of the mechanical system changes what comes out. Which is most accurate?? Who knows? What sounds best to the guy who spends the time in front of the speakers is what matters. What i strive for is finding a nice sonic space to hide in and the more details my system gives up the more insight i get as to what the musician was doing, as opposed to "reproducing how it was intended to sound by the engineer. I refuse to chase the audiophile ghost, i want to listen to music.
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 16, 2006 10:08:12 GMT -7
looks like a tangent...might as well keep on it Billy, guitarman i used to be another vandy owner and lover (lived with some 1-Bs for about 20 yrs) but when i went for the upgrade i discovered Dunlavy speakers before the old guy retired. I'd love to get some Vandy Vs but too much money for me. Both the Dunlavys and the Vandys use time alignment and phase considerations in their designs (i think theil is another one) so they have a similar sonic flavor and attention to accuracy. current rig is VTL 185 mono blocks with a 5.5 pre amp. recently retubed with Winged C 6550s in the power amps with NOS mullard 12AX7 and 12AT7s everywhere they were needed. Audio Research CD-2 Dunlavy Athenas CJ walker table with a LInn Basik arm using an old B&O reciever for phono pre and tuner Harmonic technology truthlinks with a HT pro silway II between the pre and the CD and HT Pro 9 biwire speaker cables kind of a stupid money system but i took advantage of the audiophile habit of trading stuff all the time and got it for about half price or less on the net. Funny thing the guy i got the amps and pre from (lived in NC) had a pair of athenas he sold to a guy in Georgia. turns out i ended up finding those same speakers for sale a few months after i bought the amps...looks like karma destined them to be together...electronic true love!. I got involved in a discussion on Audio gon about the possibility of accurately reproducing a live preformance on a home system and when you consider the interactions between the instruments, the PA and the room all in real time there is no way to expect to reproduce that from some studio engineed work, or even a board dump. Take the sonic interaction (wave addition and subtraction and phase cancelations etc on a grand scale) out of the picture and you have a recording. It's all that stage chaos that keeps me from chasing guitar cables and the detail stuff. the big sonic picture from my amp, and hopefully my hands, is all i can expect to get through to the audience so that is all i'm focussing on . I also look to gett an inspirational sound and feel out of my amp for my benifit but again that is big picture stuff. With a little more help from jason and the rest of you (thanks all!!) my Rx is gettin closer to Nirvana. that $250k system was getting pretty close to the best reproduction possible. I was listening to solo upright bass and for the first time i really understood what was ment when the reviewer says the system gave an accurate representation of the the room the player was in...i mean you could really imagine where the walls in the recording venue were. i was kind of bummed about my system when i left but after about 10 minutes of listening to my rig and thinking that the quarter mil would only get maybe 10% more ...and you have to have the room for it, in my space i bet the tall dollare system wouldn't sound much different than my rig....i went back to being perfectly happy. The one thing to keep in mind is system balance is key not how much the system cost, much like finding the right tube, speaker, DR z combo to make every thing perfect FOR YOU. My system has smoked $90k systems, at least to my ears. All the tweaking of stereos is just about finding the perfect coloration. I've found that there are reproducable sonic differences between cables and even using different vibration dampnining under components because changing the resonances of the mechanical system changes what comes out. Which is most accurate?? Who knows? What sounds best to the guy who spends the time in front of the speakers is what matters. What i strive for is finding a nice sonic space to hide in and the more details my system gives up the more insight i get as to what the musician was doing, as opposed to "reproducing how it was intended to sound by the engineer. I refuse to chase the audiophile ghost, i want to listen to music. Nice gear dude. I've read allot about the Dunlavy's but never had a chance to hear any. I think we need to really open up Pandora's box and start a thread on the merits of tube vs. solid state components. Care to chime in Odin?
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 16, 2006 11:29:02 GMT -7
My JoLida integrated is VERY moderatley prices for a tube amp with 60 watts per side. Compared to my old Boothroyd-Stewart 100 watt monoblocks the Jolida has a thicker bass but the old B-Rs were actually a little thin in the low end. More than anything else, I think that's why I've stuck with the JoLida. Next time I'll buy a higher powered solid state amp. I like less maintenance than tubes for the stereo. For one reason, I just don't sit in one place and listen to music anymore. Maybe if Hendrix, Steeleye Span and the Beatles were still making new records I would. Personally it seems the best way to accurately hear the place and time of a recording would be binaural recordings litened to with headphones but there isn't much of that available. I actually listen to more recordings from the 40s and 50s now than anything else and the equipment I use becomes less important. I'll never go to normal consumer electronics for my main stereo. I can definitely hear the difference and the consumer stuff is just lacking. Like the difference between mass produced guitar gear versus Zs, etc..
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 16, 2006 14:44:00 GMT -7
I think we need to really open up Pandora's box and start a thread on the merits of tube vs. solid state components. Care to chime in Odin? Uh...all I'll say about that one is someone thinks solid state sounds good then they should save their money and buy solid state. I'm all about new technology and such, but only when it's better. To date, I haven't heard a solid state device that even approaches the sound of a good tube amp. If it were out there I'd have already bought two of them. But some people are happy with their SS amps. There's no accounting for taste. As far as the audiophile thing goes, if I inheireted Bill Gates' money tmorrow I'd build a stupid big mansion with all the latest toys, including theater and audio rooms. But I wouldn't go beyond where I could hear an obvious difference in sound quality. I wouldn't spend $250K on a stereo system. I mean, 5 years down the road all that cash will be wasted because something better will come out, so why spend the money? I don't begrudge the ultra-rich their $250K audio systems, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm not laughing at them either. With the SS amp guys I don't laught at them, but I stopped trying to win them over to the tube side long ago. In my experience the guys who like their Valvestate amps tend to not hear the difference or not like the sound of a "real" guitar amp, so why bother trying to sell them on the idea. You know what they say about trying to teach a pig to dance.
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on May 16, 2006 16:16:47 GMT -7
I didn't mean solid state guitar amps! The best solid state guitar amp I've heard (not jazz amps, whole 'nuther thang) for rock or blues would be the Pritchard amps. They sound good but no bloom or harmonic swirl. I don't think they'll ever be able to fake that unless thru some incredible computer program. Pete Anderson said in an interview recently that he hasn't used a tube amp to record with for the last 6 years. I think he said he was even gigging with a Line 6 DuoVerb. Different strokes..............
|
|
|
Post by Telemanic on May 16, 2006 17:15:17 GMT -7
No matter what MY opinion is, on a particular subject i always on this site, try to be non-judgemental, and tolerant, in regard to my comments and opinions and exchange of ideas. Far be it for me to claim to be so wise to call anyone a fool just because they have the means, and self indulgent passion, to spend whatever they see fit or hear what they hear. I know whats foolish for "ME", i'll leave it to odin to decide whats foolish for others to spend on their gear.
|
|
|
Post by JASON (aka jgleaton) on May 16, 2006 21:07:09 GMT -7
i'll leave it to odin to decide whats foolish for others to spend on their gear. My wifes say's leave it to HER to decide whats foolish for me to spend on MY gear.... ;D ;D Thus the sneaking the Z in the back door blues... meet the UPS guy at the house before she gets home hell hounds on my trail... No thats not a new one honey.... Z GAS Foolishness continues!
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 17, 2006 5:47:45 GMT -7
My JoLida integrated is VERY moderatley prices for a tube amp with 60 watts per side. Compared to my old Boothroyd-Stewart 100 watt monoblocks the Jolida has a thicker bass but the old B-Rs were actually a little thin in the low end. More than anything else, I think that's why I've stuck with the JoLida. Next time I'll buy a higher powered solid state amp. I like less maintenance than tubes for the stereo. For one reason, I just don't sit in one place and listen to music anymore. Maybe if Hendrix, Steeleye Span and the Beatles were still making new records I would. Personally it seems the best way to accurately hear the place and time of a recording would be binaural recordings litened to with headphones but there isn't much of that available. I actually listen to more recordings from the 40s and 50s now than anything else and the equipment I use becomes less important. I'll never go to normal consumer electronics for my main stereo. I can definitely hear the difference and the consumer stuff is just lacking. Like the difference between mass produced guitar gear versus Zs, etc.. There is a Jolida dealer about 2 blocks from my office & I occasionally go in there for a listen. The Jolida stuff is very musical, well built and I think a huge bang-for-the-buck. Kind of like Dr. Z amps IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by guitarman1 on May 17, 2006 5:50:06 GMT -7
I think we need to really open up Pandora's box and start a thread on the merits of tube vs. solid state components. Care to chime in Odin? Uh...all I'll say about that one is someone thinks solid state sounds good then they should save their money and buy solid state. I'm all about new technology and such, but only when it's better. To date, I haven't heard a solid state device that even approaches the sound of a good tube amp. If it were out there I'd have already bought two of them. I was refering to audio components....not guitar amps. But some people are happy with their SS amps. There's no accounting for taste. As far as the audiophile thing goes, if I inheireted Bill Gates' money tmorrow I'd build a stupid big mansion with all the latest toys, including theater and audio rooms. But I wouldn't go beyond where I could hear an obvious difference in sound quality. I wouldn't spend $250K on a stereo system. I mean, 5 years down the road all that cash will be wasted because something better will come out, so why spend the money? I don't begrudge the ultra-rich their $250K audio systems, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm not laughing at them either. With the SS amp guys I don't laught at them, but I stopped trying to win them over to the tube side long ago. In my experience the guys who like their Valvestate amps tend to not hear the difference or not like the sound of a "real" guitar amp, so why bother trying to sell them on the idea. You know what they say about trying to teach a pig to dance. Odin, I was refering to tube & solid state audio componets (pre-amps, amps, etc.) It's been a raging debate for decades in the audiophile community. I'm curious. If you did have Bill Gates money, how much would you spend on a stereo system and why?
|
|
Odin
Full Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by Odin on May 17, 2006 6:31:25 GMT -7
Uh...all I'll say about that one is someone thinks solid state sounds good then they should save their money and buy solid state. I'm all about new technology and such, but only when it's better. To date, I haven't heard a solid state device that even approaches the sound of a good tube amp. If it were out there I'd have already bought two of them. I was refering to audio components....not guitar amps. But some people are happy with their SS amps. There's no accounting for taste. As far as the audiophile thing goes, if I inheireted Bill Gates' money tmorrow I'd build a stupid big mansion with all the latest toys, including theater and audio rooms. But I wouldn't go beyond where I could hear an obvious difference in sound quality. I wouldn't spend $250K on a stereo system. I mean, 5 years down the road all that cash will be wasted because something better will come out, so why spend the money? I don't begrudge the ultra-rich their $250K audio systems, but I'm not going to pretend that I'm not laughing at them either. With the SS amp guys I don't laught at them, but I stopped trying to win them over to the tube side long ago. In my experience the guys who like their Valvestate amps tend to not hear the difference or not like the sound of a "real" guitar amp, so why bother trying to sell them on the idea. You know what they say about trying to teach a pig to dance. Odin, I was refering to tube & solid state audio componets (pre-amps, amps, etc.) It's been a raging debate for decades in the audiophile community. I'm curious. If you did have Bill Gates money, how much would you spend on a stereo system and why? As much as it cost to get the sound I was really happy with. I'd listen to everything, no matter how expensive, and buy whatever sounded the way I wanted it to sound. That's what I do with guitar amps. If I liked a Dumble better than my Dr Z I'd buy a Dumble. But if I had to go into a sterile room and meditate in order to hear the difference in the speaker cables then I'd laugh at the salesperson and go buy something else. I'd just want something that sounded great and was loud. If not spending a quarter mil on my home stereo means I don't have the "best" there is I can live with that, as long as I'm happy with the sound. I also wouldn't drive a Maybach or a Bentley to the beer store, just because I could. I'd still drive my truck because it's comfortable and useful and I like it. True, my leather seats were made from an ordinary dead cow and the Maybach's leather seats were made from the hide of a purebred steer that was hand fed imported alfafa and Evian and slept on a chenille bed in a climate controlled suite, but both seats hold I disagree all the way to the beer store and back in comfort. The Ford seats don't come with the same bragging rights, but who cares.
|
|
|
Post by anacephalic on May 17, 2006 8:30:17 GMT -7
the last 2 times i've seen Pete Anderson he was indeed using the line 6.
As to SS stereo amps the Pass labs stuff is pretty good with solid bass nice mids, fairly open on top but no real substitute to tubes. If i had to go SS that would be high on my list. On the other side of the coin Mark Levinson gear is pretty sterile to my ears even at the new car prices they charge for some of them. The tube gear has a wide range of "tubeyness" audio research tends to be most solid state but still way more open on top than real SS and warmer in the mids. VTL is also less tubey and more neutral but the mids are so nice with tight bass. CJ gets to the tubier end of the spectrum with plummy mids and a softer bass.
One thing that needs a lot of attention with a good home stereo is setup and tweaking. It took about 3 days of significant fiddling to get my speakers set up properly in the room so that no room modes were energized or dampended any more than could be avoided, so that center image focus was solid and that side and rear wall reflections were minimized or at least delayed enough to avoid smearing. Dressing all the cables properly and consider vibration control under the CDP or tube gear had a huge impact, mostly the vibration control. I also needed some large plants to add diffusion between the speakers and the bay window and glass door to kill the evil reflections that happened there,. Do that kind of set up with ANY reasonably good system and the improvements in sound will be huge. If you just stuff a $100k system into a room helter skelter the results would be beyond dissapointing.
IMO from what i've heard after years of doing the hi fi thing, if a person chose wisely and developed a well matched system $25k retail (about 60% of that used) would get you 90% of what is possible, especially in a normal listening environment. To justify $50-$100k or more in a system i'd say an acoustically engineered room would be a must otherwise it's just wasting money. For me a bunch of money in a system is easily worth it because i spend a lot of time setting in the dark with a glass of something just listening for hours (escaping the reality of 3 year old twins and a 7mo old to be honest) but for casual listening less than $5k should get a killer system.
|
|