Preamp Deal of the Century

The First Sound is an excellent preamp--it has a "blacker" background than I have been able to achieve with the Syrah, and is incredibly dynamic. However, I believe the Syrah has a much more layered sound and just seems more "right" to me. By comparison, I felt the First Sound's presentation was slightly compressed. For what it's worth, I am using a Plinius SA-102 with the Syrah and have not tried a tube amp with either the Syrah or the First Sound, so you may want to cast about for another opinion. All I can tell you is that once I heard the Syrah, I have never looked back and never get the itch to upgrade my preamp. Only when someone convinces me that the new Cortese is that much better than the Syrah will I consider selling it.

Linkster, if you look on the Supratek website www.supratek.biz it has info on the # of inputs/outputs for the Cortese. According to the website it does come with a remote.

Linkster,

2. I don't know of anyone on this thread who has heard both old and new versions. Email Mick.

3. I have the older version Sauvignon. I have a Cabernet on order. I will post my initial impressions soon after I get it.

5. Waltersalas had the First Sound PD II and has the Syrah now.

Seeking the following information. Thanks for your responses!

1. Is there anyone who may have a Cortese (or its equivalent linestage) in the New England area that I could hear?

2. I know Mick has recently implemented an upgrade, can anyone comment on the relative performance between the two versions of the Cortese (linestage performance only)?

3. Likewise, does anyone have experience with the Grange (and its equivalent linestage) relative to the linestage performance of the Cortese?

4. How is the Cortese offered in its base configuration (i.e. number of inputs, remote availability)?

5. Has anyone compared the Cortese with the Hovland or First Sound Presence Deluxe II? Can you comment on the relative performance?

It is an attractive and interesting space ship..It does hide the screen..It fuctions very well and there are no flashing lights to scare my neighbors or to make their dogs cry.As for the Bp20's I have sold many of those in the past .They benefit greatly with the addition of the threaded 1.5 in Audiopoints, really open up and make the bass much more articulate much more apparent speed and attack.Also give the front nose a slight tilt up.. about 5 degrees.Great buy for you..Tom

Tom,

I Bow to you in gratitude! I will first say a merry good morning to you and thank you for your anti-whacking prevention position! I read your comments on 1-11-04 regarding you finding the Bass on your ceiling and geometrically rechanneling the energy toward your listening chair. I laughed so hard I nearly soiled myself! LOL :-)

I like your space ship! A Man's Cave space or a Space Ship like listening room must be tweaked to personal liking without "killing the music". I desire more of a Star Trek Bridge room motif myself, complete with a Captain Kirk styled listening chair. Since I am married, fending off my listening cave space from my wonderful wife's desire to alter (feminize) is an ongoing vigil.

Preamp Deal of the Century: I have found a couple of used Bryston preamplifiers BP20 (640.00) and a BP25MC (a little higher here $1,330.00 with MM and MC phono stage) on the used market are some very good values. If you can find a used Bryston BP25MC closer to $1,100.00 you have done very well. Very clean sounding with a dark silent backgroud.

Thanks again Tom :-)

Good Morning to All

Dear Asa,

To sum it up...I hear, you hear, they hear.

Natural is as to organically created ( human voice and winded pitch instrument oscillations, human striking mineral and organic resonant objects, and friction induced resonations).

Yes, a given it is, and understood not yet to be exactly electro mechanically reproduced as compared to a live violinist creating a "Natural Sound". A Violinist Playing in ones left ear and the best methods of reproductions of the same playing through a speaker in one's right ear does not a reference make,...but of course, no two listeners by individual description does not a reference make as well.

Audiophile Reference is not concrete nor has a standard of measure that I can tell with exception of one's nearest description of Hmmm to closer understanding with another's Hmmm.

With one being exactly equal to another... then there is reference. No two exact finger prints, no two exact ears (of hearing by description) no true reference and no true human measurement of such.

Current flow and Composit Frequencies competing and colliding harmonically in persuit of the most conductive path of least resistance only to be thrust into an inductive and ancient artifact of diaphragm technology...just a little stronger, yet lighter, faster and more...sensitive.

In Summary:

With all said and done with descriptions of Soundstage, depth and transparency...are we all just trying to achieve a scaled up to room size set of better headphones? LOL :-)

Let me be the first to say honestly that I know nothing of what I'm talking about. I understand some of what others say and I sincerely appreciate their much higher knowledge and experience. As for my self...I am void reference :-)

Audiogon is an Oracle of some truly knowledgable individuals with great experience that freely shares with lessor beings of knowledge and experience such as myself.

On Point to Preamp Deal of the Century: I'm still building an endless system of upgrades of higher quality. If you listen to a component system you like be it used from a friend or new...Buy it. If you can't afford it... finance it and Buy it. I'm learning the true costs of experimenting, buying multiples of items (cables of various types and other goodies). I do understand ampacity, attenuation, current, conductor quality, impedence, inductive capacitance (LC)influences in respect to frequency and some other good stuff. I'm reading about Marketing Major frequency speaking Voodoo Cable Witch Doctors right now. Very good money invested in a very good preamp is money well spent and likely won't be changed out for a while. Don't skimp too much on the Preamp, get what you want.

Thanks to all,

Rcnc500

Cello - Try the B&K 747B. It is a solid-state design, is reliable, and low-maintenance. Alternately get a TV-7. It will test older tubes like the WE101D (used in the Grange) that the 747B cannot test. The TV-7 is very popular with tube sellers on ebay. There is a guy in Chandler AZ named Dan Nelson, who is nationally known for rebuilding and calibrating TV-7's. Dan calibrated my B&K 747B. Contact me if you want his info.

Ecclectique very eloquently stated the benefits of tube rolling the regulators but he didn't comment on soundstage stability during very large dynamic peaks. IMO, this is very important in an all-tube power supply. Just something else to consider.

Asa, Eccletique & Bwhite,

Thanks so much for all of the incredibly well articulated help. As a result, I am off to see the tube Wizard and take advantage of your collective advice. I will let you know where I land and how it all turns out.

Now that I seem to be in the tube business, I am thinking it would be wise to own a tube tester. Can any one weigh in on what would be the best tester to get ?

Thanks to all !

Cello and others, the regulator tubes you select will make a big difference in the overall sound of your preamp. Both the Cortese AND the Syrah are rather responsive to these tubes.

You will have to try many to find out what's best in your system and for your tastes. While I agree with Asa that the 6SN7's make a more profound difference, the 6L6's, once you've heard what they do, cannot be ignored.

Right now, I find the clear glass Genalex Gold Lion KT66's to be the best regulator tubes. They are somewhat expensive but can be found on Ebay for around 200 a pair. This is money well spent. IMHO, The sound is legendary.

For those still using TS 5881's. PLEASE try something else you will be VERY glad you did.

Hello Cello. Re: regulators in the supratek. They do indeed influence the sound of the pre,however...their influence is nowhere near the dramatic difference of the 6sn7 or the rectifier choice for that matter.I am using the syrah,not the cortese,however,I think the tube topology of the power supply is identical to both units, wherby the regulators are employed on the power supply chassis of the cortese along with the gz34.The syrah uses the regulators on the chassis of the pre and the rectifier is located on the seperate power supply.We have a large selection of different tubes and types that can be employed here for regulation duty.All of them being employed as a means of further smoothing the ripple of the rectifier.I believe this is why many believe that they have "no" influence on the sound of any given amplifier.The choice of rectifier and regulators can make a profound difference [as I am sure you heard when swapping out the stock 5ar4/gz34]. One can use an original NOS American [beam tetrodes] 6L6,G,GA,GB,GC, 5881, the obsenely expensive WE 350b and many others as well as their nos Euro equivalents like the el-34,el-37,Kt66,Kt-77 etc[read expensive again]. Most all of these tubes will sound a little different than the current modern equivalents like the eh 5881,russian or chineese 6L6's, kt-66 or el34's. I for one, cannot tolerate the russian KT-66,6L6,5881 as regulators in my rig, I do find the current chineese Kt-66 the most relaxed sounding of any of the modern made equivalents.All nos 6L6 will better "any" of the modern equivalents with the possible execption of the original nos 6L6 [metal] which... in my rig sounds very similiar to the sovteks. The tung sol 5881 is the tube of choice here, however the old 6L6g [ST-bottle shaped version only] is also a very nice choice and can be found for typically 20% of the cost of the tung-sols.Regulators will not influence frequency or tone like that of the 6sn7 tube types.Their impact or influence has more to do with air and spatial cues in a sublimal sense.A sound that is more relaxed and effortless in a musical way. Allowing one to hear very fine micro detail, nuance and subtle spatial cues that are burried in the texture of the music.This hidden imformation is definitively masked when the stock tubes are used...This hidden imformation or nuance per say is very clearly resolved ,its just simply "there" and coherent in a natural kind of way with out requiring one to concentrate in order to hear these artifacts in the recording. It seems to pull you in closer to the music and forget about your equipment.Really very obvious when one puts the stock tubes back in.The genelec kt-66 or mullard el 37 are probably the best of all of the types I have listed here and will get you very close to the greatest beamed power tube ever produced, The Western Electric 350b. A side note here for supratek owners... There is another nos tube that I am currently employing for regulation duty in the syrah that I honestly believe can hold its own with the esteemed WE 350b! The best of it is...they can be had for pennies. I will post my thoughts here after I have climatized myself with this particular tube.

Asa, Thanks for your quick answer. - It's a big help.

Any clues on the best place to hunt up a pair of NOS WE350B's, WE 300VB's or Tungsol Brown Base 5881's ? If you were going to pick one of the group to start with, which one would you pick ?

I was told that the Neotron's are TungSol round plates. They are a French labeled product with the word Neotron & 6SN7 printed in red letters on the blackened glass. The base is black plastic like.

Cello, glad you are happy with the pre and, yes, I do think the regulators make a difference. Mick told me he didn't think they would, but most people that own the pre, I would venture, would disagree. I have Tungsol brown-base 5881's in mine and like them quite well. The sound difference is not as dramatic as the 6SN7 sub, but it is of the same kind; once you have the PS rectifier and the 6SN7's about right, or just right like you seem to have, then you can hear it. The sound is more...relaxed, dynamics not quite as jumpy but more of an even rise time, although the scaling itself in terms of energy has not been changed. A bit like the dynamics of a good WE 300B, which ain't bad. Not quite that good, but in the same way. It was worth it; about $120 for a good matched NOS set off of ebay.

I balked at the regs too for a while, but bwhite talked me into it. He also has the Cortese (I have have Syrah) so his comments might be more relevant. Also, Ecclectique here says, with wisened ears, that the sin qua non is the WE350B's, which feels right, real right, to me, although I haven't heard them in the pre (very pricey). There's some talk about them above if you scan.

BTW, I'm not familiar with the Neotrons (Tungsol round plates marked that?)...

Tom, nice post, thank you. Although I know what you mean by some posts on this site - most sites, actually - it is also true that many times a similar affliction is one of patronizing criticism without rationale, which, ironically, hypocritically, or at least in my book, is of a similar-in-kind offense as the one you cited. I do not think that citing an offense on the latter constitutes being "whacked." But enough of that...

I agree with you completely on your post, but with all the do-dads out there it sometimes takes a lot of experimentation to "see" the fluid thing. You can change a room a lot, but its best to let it breath. In the best of these types of rooms, some people initially call them live rooms, but as you said, its more than that, although, metaphorically, the room does seem more alive, as in organic, symmetrical in how sound "moves" (propagates/dissipates). The mind, on an existential level, is very sentitive to time/space incongruencies and a damped-type room can many times worsen things on that level while, on a level of perception that is less deep (where the mind is not listening as deep) some things may be perceived as improved. Which is why its tough to get a room right. Some rooms are well nigh impossible, but if you have a decent starting place you can have a room that is receptive, as in, one that allows energy to flow (its a vessel, as you say). Or rather, the room allows a simulcrum of the illusion of non-stereo produced music through a stereo instrument. The sound is not the same as heard in an orchestra, BUT the mind's perception of that musical event is catalyzed to similar depths of perception; the sound may be different, but the experience of the mind is similar (that's for you, Rcn...). A good, en-livened room can be a vessel for that message to be heard and experienced.

I remember I once visited the good men at Shun Mook at their homes in CA. The man who owned the company collected violins and when he placed a certain violin hanging by a thread centered in space behind the speakers, the dynamic/spatial nature of the room became a touch more "organic", continuous, etc. Even more strangely, he then put up a very rare and beautiful sounding violin in the same place and the room was utterly transformed, all the above traits seeming to be released and settled into each other, until all you did is fall back into the music and forget those traits at all; the mind was not cued to deep spatial incongruencies of sound movement and so you went deeper. It was an interesting experiment...

Has anyone rolled the regulator tubes (6L6EH's) that come with the Cortese ?

I was told that rolling the 2 regulators does not make much (if any) difference in the sound of the Cortese. Has anyone had great success in changing out the stock 6L6EH's and if so, what sonic changes did you hear and what tube yielded the best results ?

I have had some fantastic results with Neotron (NOS) 6SN7's and a GZ34 in place of the 2 6N6P's & the 5AR4 that Mick included. Both cost a fortune, but what difference. The sound is just spectacular. I loved my Cortese before the addition of these 3 new tubes and now it’s just beyond Heaven to sit down and listen.

Thin skinned maybe. Some of my ideas on this site have gotten me wacked. Some days I lack the skills and the patience to explain some of the methods that I use, some will be applied to real acoustic musical instruments. I try not to dampen anything.I believe in direct coupling.Equipment is direct coupled, speakers, subs ,even the acoustic devices I built to redirect the flow. I think of my room as an aerodynamic vessel not as a room that needs to be tamed and dampened by lotsa sound deadening materials. I killed the music in previous rooms of mine. I try to focus the energy that is trapped along 90degree surfaces. Dynamics speed and resolution are not lost in this method of control and refocusing of the natural energy contained in the room. I am not a engineer I am not a mathematician..These are ideas and concepts that I have am willing to experiment with and ask for the proper help when needed. So when I stated that my soundstage was 180 degrees or more I feel I was not mistating this audible and visual presence. Others who have come by stated the same thing. A few ,before they arrived, said it had to be gross reflections, when they left they said it wasn't reflections after all. Now it does not do this trippy stuff on every recording but the stage is always outside of the box. Some of these ideas came from the use of Argent Room Lenses. Again sound pressure is like fluid in that it can be redirected and refocused. Moving the Room Lenses around I found that the edges of the stage were more defined and sharpened. By doing this, broadens the stage I feel in a natural way. I found in my room that there is a bass suckout. The bass is in the room but it is on the ceiling. I found this out one day while playing music and changing a ceiling lamp. So I built a 5 sided panel of three different angles that is direct coupled to the ceiling that captures and redirects some of this lost bass energy back to my listening chair. The fellow that built the panel said it looks like a space ship. The ship is dual purpose,it also contains my projection screen. So because I state these ideas and describe these devices in vague terms I leave myself open to being wacked. Self fullfilling I guess. These ideas and other concepts are ways I maximise the sound of equipement in my room. These are concepts that I try to design into customers systems as well. Tom

Rcn: nice on the...poetry (I liked it, actually, quite smart!), but are you trying to say you are a relativist, ie. that all fingerprints are equal? Haven't met many scientists that feel that way...Really though, I'd be interested.

Question to start you off, if you choose to start there: What is "natural"? If sound is defined, as a scientist would, as a materialist phenomenon, then all sound is in nature; in that all sound you hear is in "nature," as that all sound is in reality. Ergo, the stereo sound is as "natural" as any other sound.

So, assuming, arguendo, that all sounds are, um, real, then there must be some other "reference" that you are using than merely the materialist objective. Which, of course, leaves the subjective. Or, more precisely, the mind's relationship with the objective. Which necessarliy implies, that the difference you are citing between stereo sound and, um, "natural" sound, is one of perception by the mind. On the other hand, maybe you mean that a stereo will never replicate the objective sound propogation of an orchestra, which seems to be an obvious given, so it couldn't be that. Which then makes one assume that, again, you must mean the subjective, and...well, maybe you should say what you mean clearer. You can leave in the fun too.

Tom: disappointed that you can't seem to come in out of the cold. Consider this: the root of the word "ignorance" is to ignore...

bwhite: you are a scrappy guy, no doubt. Just be careful, though, don't get lost in that forest of rectifiers (like I've done in the forest of Toms!)

Yea, tubegoover: I never understand these guys: give 'em a bit-o-knowledge or socio-economic leverage - I'm a physicist, I'm a rich guy, I'm a dealer, I, I, I - and they think that the world falls away. Credentials don't answer the question, WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT WAY AND WHAT ARE YOUR LOGICAL/EXPERIENTIAL REASONS FOR SAYING SO?

It seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Or, is this just a small white guy sword fight with no faces/answers?

Tom instead of your bits of bites why don't you serve us up a meal. What do you like, what works and why and furthermore, have you heard a Supratek product and if not, nor are interested, why are you driving in this neck of the woods with your nebulous comments? Ok so you've got 30 years and you've listened to a lot of gear and your a dealer and you are presumably here to enlighten us, so enlighen. This is no place for cynics that haven't heard, no one here is interested, no offense but make a point beyond methodogy man.

Signal current pressures in a can,
expelled compositly through a diaphragm.
Does not equate to natural sound,
but supports the squawk that goes around.
If all knew sound through the same ear,
would there be reason to be hear? :-)

Appliances of variable acoustical physics, and ears as diverse as finger prints.

Reference is a variable.

This is what I have learned today!

Sorry all, I have no wine or wisdom. Even NASA Design Engineers aren't perfect...however, it is fun to BS about the aim of perfection.

Worse than the classic definition of ignorance[ lack of knowledge] is one possessing a shut down mind. Reminds me of dampening devices such as lead or rubber, materials that slow , alter and destroy the natural dynamics of music. Thats all about friction and thats not what this is about...Tom

Jaded?? Who me? Nah! I'm still waiting for Mick to provide information about the "new" Supratek upgrades he announced to this thread - on October 23. And... getting tired of the selfrighteous BS which has been posted to this thread lately...

I want to talk Supratek's and tubes man! Enough with the bickering - mine's bigger than yours kinda stuff!

Along those lines - a little bird told me Mick will be introducing a NEW entry level preamp very soon... Forgot what its called exactly but... I know its another wine (one I've never heard of)

Other than that, I'm cycling through various rectifiers and regulator tubes in the Cortese. I've got about 15 more rectifiers on the way as well as some GEC KT77 and Mullard EL37's to try.

The Cortese is massively sensitive to these tubes.

With my current Mullard GZ37 and Genalex Gold Lion KT66's the sound is super involving but a wee bit too rich and/or muddy to be natural. With Mullard GZ37 and Sylvania 5932 - (black single plate with holes variety) the sound of the system is reminiscent of an SME30 - very precise - very neutral - natural - and very boring. ;)

I'm trying to get somewhere in-between.

I've been through a lot of rectifiers lately and I keep coming back to the GZ37 in my system because it seems to synergize best.

**I'm still looking for some killer 350b's.

Other than that? Hmmm... Oh... get yourself a Meitner (Museatex) Bidat if you bother listening to digital & have it upgraded by John Wright. Its the "DAC Deal Of The Century!" no joke.

Tom, don't quit. I really don't think bwhite wants you to either; its the desert and all, all the 62's...

You are a bright person, and bigger than that. We may disagree, but not really.

Consider that...

I challenge you, in the best way, to shrluff it off and bring up another subject, in the stereo concept of course.

You've talked about what others have done, but I've been holding it out to you (to pick the good to talk about, or choose to ignore, or choose...): what stereo piece really makes you swoon? And, why?

And, finally, if bright, you must say what constitutes ignorance. Its only fair, all around.

Mark

Damn, Bryon, you are getting jaded in your "old" age! It didn't take you very long, did it? Do you remember? Anyway, you don't have to answer (but, are you ready to?). Very proud, if I might say, if you allow me; wish I could give you a million dollars to blow on WAVAC amps! But, then again, you may not now. Funny how that happens...

Here's something odd: as I wrote the above I kept wondering - What happened to bwhite? And there you were, two seconds after the post, checking my spelling with this wine in my hand. Just randomness, I suppose, can't prove it to another, so it must be not-real...Must be the wine, yea, that's the easy answer...

Where are you "at" with the Supra? And, with all else? Hit another desert, yet?

Okay I'll shut up...As some say ignorance is bliss and others just call it ignorance.. Find out for your self. Tom

Damn Theaudiotweak, that's amazing! You must be the best audio guy ever!!! Yawn.....

Tom, I know you aren't going to make people "see" by listening to stereo, but its more than just airflow, isn't it? (although looking at "airflow" is a good too, or 52's, 600's, .314's, or, um, infinite fractal regressions beneath all those numbers, right?). On the other hand, I think a lot of people are here not simply for the gear (although, we should admit, it is always a remnant of consideration, as I look out at my black and gold and rosewood gleaming totem of "me"...).

It may sound contrite, but only because it remains so simple: people come here, you too, because you are in search of "beauty", in this case in sound transmuted into the "shape" of music in your mind. And, I would submit, that attraction is a symptom of a recoil from its opposite: not-beauty, or what is percieved as such. People come home from their capitalist-conformist lives, hardly what Locke had in mind, and sit down to go to a place, which is in their mind. No, stereo does not change ground orientation - how one is in the world when not listening to stereo - but it is a tonic from that world, is it not? Isn't that a gradiation you are willing to concede; have already conceded by still being here?

Eccl: love to hear you on NOS tubes! More of that! Please. Yes, the Mullard 12AU7's are a good point to make, I have several pairs for my amp and arrived at them the hard way, which I would further submit, is how I arrived there. Consider this: I have people contact me to ask about stuff - which is quite nice, if they are, and I know you help around too - but isn't it true that sometimes you can say to someone do-this-or-that, just a suggestion, and they head head-strong into what Tom Gillette says? Its conformism, attachment to the feeling of security, actually a secondary symptom of the fear of making a mistake (um, that others might see) that then, in fact, causes the mistake. And it takes a few knocks on the head to go out and get a tube-tester, doesn't it? So, is the path ever separate from the eventual knowledge gained? I used to be more impatient, but, you know, everyone is in different places, just trying to get there, whether they know it or not...whether they like 62's in public, and then, the tonic when they are alone... (sorry Tom, just want you to talk more, you know...and, of course, see how many hyphenated words I can work into one run-on - oh, there I go again - sentence...:0).

Question: Isn't the frustration only a frustration at where you once were? Hmmm.

Great music in the next room right now, and good people here, "difference" doesn't matter; they are all going towards "quality."

The Supratek ain't a bad place to start...

Mark

Sorry guys its not reflection and it aint no Bose speaker neither. Its resolution and room geometry controlling the air flow, umm like a manifold in a car..Room pressure reducing the 90's to 40's 58's and 62's..depends on the volume and ratios..I record live acoustic instruments in this same room. Just using what I got...Bend it shape it contour it don't let it stick and come back at you later..Tom

Tubegroover, I was going to kid Audiotweak that he may have some reflection problems going on... but you beat me to it.

Hey Tom, your point is well taken and I also totally agree. Now if we could all agree on what constitutes accurate sound as opposed to tuning a system to suit our ears. Let's face it, one can never know how accurate a reproduction is unless he/she was present at the recording session. Even then there would be dispute between one listener and another. I'm not so certain that hearing a recording reproduce a 180 degree panorama of sound is accurate but I'd sure bet it is aurally stimulating!

ASA...... Dammit..... ya caught me red handed... Next time, I think I will just leave the Kens at home.

Asa the turn on or the fix is the awakening of the video head who hears my two channel surround system and asks where I am hiding the center speaker. I then ask them to close their eyes and and point to the edges of the sound stage, the reaction is 180 degrees or more. Its just stereo, what can one expect...Tom

I hear you Tom! and a very good point. One hell of a lot of experimentation going on out there without some type of methodology or reference point to work with.And with tubed gear, more often then not, it can lead far too many poor souls into proverbial Bermuda Triange. I have read more hype and BullShit regarding vacuum tubes here and there and everywhere on the net. Too many people that I know personally have rolled different tubes, way to many times until they are so confused and frustrated with how bad their stuff sounds, that they start looking at what to upgrade next. They read somewhere on the net,some inexperienced dimwit professing that the 12abcdxyz is an auwsome tube, and then they go out buy some tired tube pulls or relabelled fakes they saw on ebay, and they don't even own a tube tester nor know how to use one!A simple recipe for disaster if one has little or no experience with tube brands,tube types, vintages, and tube topology. It's really a simple rule of thumb....If your going to invest in NOS tubes,buy a tube tester and learn how to use it. That said: there is no denying that many NOS tubes can transform most any well designed amplifier[vintage,modern, DIY or otherwise]into a magical experience. Examples you say: Try a fresh siemen ecc803/12ax7 [60,s vintage] in any interation of the audio research sp series preamps and most would soil themselves at the transformation.I am not talking tonal balance tweeks here gang, but a whole higher league altogether. For those that use a modern amp with a 12au7 as a driver tube, now try a 60,s vintage mullard [10m series] or mazda chrome plate from the same era and you'll think you have died and gone to heaven.Ever heard an original genelex KT77 in place of an el-34? Now thats an ear opener if the ever was one!It just doesn't get any better than that!Same with the Genelex Kt-88 or Kt-66 to name a few more. Forget the tonal balancing act here gang,its a whole nother order of magnitude better in every which way! Tonal balance changes? Far easier accomplished with speaker placement, room treatments and cables, "NOT" the tubes.

Eccl: nice response, thank you; I just knew there was some juicy-good experience lurking back there...:o) Yes, agreed, NOS tubes are different in different applications, but I guess what I was trying to say: Which one do you reach for first when approaching any system with the Supratek? The initial orientation, I would resubmit, is to reach for an insertion of the "organic" first, reaching for the Ken's, that act being itself a symptom of the slight leaning of the Supratek in the opposing direction towards "clearness", in a general sense. And, yes, Mullards, particularly vintage EL 34's in a CJ, might make me pause with the black Kens. I assume you were using that extreme as illustration... (and, so you know, eccl, I'd like to respond to a lot more of what you said, maybe later).

On auidiotweak, generally, well, mostly generally:

I know what audiotweek is saying - that we must be careful that we are not hearing what someone has told us we should hear, or that we want to hear. Or, even, that we don't tell ourselves, in that self delusion, that the euphonic "color difference" is the "organic" that catalyzes the listening mind towards deeper experience of the beauty and meaning within music (as opposed to just listening to "colorations" in sound). And yet, even as I say the above, can't you perceive the obvious difference in those two orientations? Jim said it well, and, er, more concisely than moi: different is not synonomous with better.

A focus on "different" can be seen as analogous to a focus on changes in relative quantity (different "colors" but really just the same in ability to catalyze deeper listening experiences), while that orientaion which is conoted by "better", addresses concepts of "quality" (and which I would submit means, in our context, a component that is "better" able to catalyze a deeper relationship between mind and sound/music). What jim says is, and what I was trying to clumsily say above about people at a transition point when approaching the Supratek, is that people here seem ready to get past the merely quantitative, some perhaps just at the precipice; of now looking for that "something" in their system that transcends the quantitive search for accuracy in its comparison of the same "colors", or "details", or....its now about the pull of "quality" that brings people here as a primary motive of will. And having just arrived there/here, naturally, they seek out an informed peer group; informed both quantitatively AND qualitatively.

I think audiotweak knows this deep down, he's just spent too much time selling gear to guys with money and no ears (ie the will to go deeper in themselves as secondary orientation, desire to induce coveting in others primary). Seeing this too much can lead to a bit a post modern malaise, eh, audiotweak? :0)

Remember, though, if you want to take on the mantle of teacher, one teaches through inspiration - as in, inspire the qualitative will towards deeper musical experience - not just the conveyance to others of "method" or "design", or "implementation" of method and mechanos (all quantitative-orientated words, something to self-reflectiveley ponder given the above...).

Einstein said, "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

Inspire first, towards that "something" beyond mechanos, even while explaining the implementation of empiric comparison. Yet never forget, the former is primary in our search, whether it be for "better" sound, or "better" mathematics, or better "design", or...I think you know this too, audiotweak.

You know, making inspiration towards "quality" the primary orientation doesn't always and necessarily mean irrational regression...That's where hope rests.

My backround in audio and video goes back over thirty years. It is and has been my hobby and profession over the same span of time. I have owned way back tube equipment from Marantz, Mac, Arc, Conrad, Sonic Frontiers ,Cary and Melos and Bat..Some of this gear is in use in my system today.None of it in a total state of originality. I suppose my criticism is non specific at anyone person or any single instance or thread. This thread is perhaps the most mature one that I have read and participated in for sometime..Because of these feelings, impressions or even facts, I felt compelled to question some methods by which some Goners' actually evaluate parts pieces or whole audio systems. It seems at least to me some, of less experience make wholesale random changes not having a method to their enthusiastic madness. Conclusions, bashing of gear that maybe way better than any other piece of gear that they own and is far more revealing of all of the stuff attached to it and thru it. When a client asks me to lend them a cable for audition I try to take all the same cable brand and type to that clients home. How can you evaluate one cable out of perhaps six or eight that are thrown in to the mix. All the same cable all of one voice. There has to be a point of stasis to really have a basis of comparison. This is only one example... People on this thread know how to do this and implement this. For this bobby to survive and hi-end audio as an ongoing work of art to survive, those of us with the knowledge education and expertise should take it upon ourselves to inform others on proper methods of design and implementation and not just the product in the box..Tom

Theaudiotweak, I suspect most of the people here have gotten past the stage of mistaking better for different. Although sometimes it can be hard to tell. With equipment quality such as this it is easier to discern the difference... if the rest of the system is up to the task of revealing it. Which I guess goes to your point. But I am aware of at least one other user here who's system definitely is up to the task. These guys aren't swapping tubes just because they can.

Jim

Theaudiotweak,

I find your argument a bit funny considering your Audiogon name... heh heh.

Anyway, you have to remember that all audio components aimed at the retail market (in general) are designed to be sold at a particular price point. Even Mick's preamps. Also, you need to remember that all tubes are not equal. Different tubes (of the same tube type), sound different. Now, many times tube designers will use some of the least expensive tubes they can for their stock product (to get the price down ofc... excellent tubes can really inflate the price of a particular component).

I would be the last to say that any tube sounds better than the stock tubes of tube gear. I would also not say that more expensive tubes will always sound better than less expensive tubes. I have a tube DAC that sounds better with $50 Siemans Falcon 6922 tubes than $150 Amperex 7308 premium quality white label tubes. However, both of those sets of tubes completely blows away (sonically) the Russian stock tubes the DAC comes with.

The inherent thing about tubes which is both their advantage and their bane is that they do add distortion to the signal. The more tubes a signal is run through, the more distortion that is added. No way around that, that I know of. The great thing about tubes is that in general they add mostly 2nd order and 4th order distortion (mostly 4th order). This distortion is picked up by our ear as more of musical qualities than anything else. Solid state on the other hand adds mostly 3rd order distortion. 3rd order distortion is picked up by our ears as not musical at all.

The problem, Theaudiotweak, is that tubes are funky devices. Saying that a tube piece must be 'heard as it really is' is like saying the best time to take a picture of a race car is while it is going 220MPH. No matter what tubes you use in a piece of audio gear (be them stock or some of the best you can buy), the sound of the tubes is constantly changing from second 1 they are installed and the devices is turned on. It is a type of performance curve they follow during their lifetime which is constantly changing and eventually ends in the tube not able to function. And after your stock tubes need replacing, what are you going to do? Get some more of the same tubes? You can... but you will not be guarenteed the same performance of your original stock tubes. Because, in general no two sets of tubes (even the same make and model) will necessarily perform the same.

Thus, people tube roll because their is a distict possibility they can achieve better performance from different tubes then their stock ones, OR their stock ones have gone kaput and they need new tubes (thinking that different tubes might work better than stock or maybe their stock ones are not available on the open market).

Theaudiotweak, you sound like a solid state guy.

Gotta run.

KF

Tubegroover sir..I question more the method of inserting a new device into one's system than the the mere presence of the device itself. How many of us have re-tuned our system by mix-ing and not matching cables? Was it the color that we just added to the previous red that now made it sound more purple..Cause and effect. I think that it is too easy to hear a difference and everything added makes a change and change is not always recognised for the negative colorations that may result. I feel sometimes the statement system dependent is overused, abused and misused when certain equipment is inserted in the musical chain and bashed because of misapplication or the end user does not understand the inneractions of all the devices involved. I feel much equipment is never really heard as it really is, because of such poor methodology.. Tom

Hey Khrys, just give it a rest.

Everyone is now fully aware of your sentiments, so why not just move on. You are contributing nothing here.

You remind me of MikeCH in the whole Newform controversy.

Hey Kids,
I'll be looking for Mick's "wonder" at CES.
Competing with the World's competition,
Why should he be afraid?
I know, he just wants to save us money.
Lucky Us!

Regarding my last post: I should qualify things for those that are following this thread.My commentary was based solely on the use of vinyl as the source for comparison.

Good point Tom, but let me ask you a question, what component in ANY system isn't adding a degree of coloration? And what system recreates the real event? The pipedream is to think otherwise or that one technology supercedes another by virtue of the fact it is the preferred one. A nice simile is fine for now but I don't expect that the technology for reproduced as real has yet arrived or is on the immediate horizon. And besides, what would we all do if we didn't have something to "tweek"? Musical enjoyment should always be the goal, reality although a fine objective is unobtainable, like recreating the big bang, it only happens once.

Could it be that tube rolling is like mixing and matching cables in ones system? Compensation for certain attributes one thinks or feels that their system maybe lacking. Adding color here and there to fill in and round out what a particular system's owner may feel their rig is missing.Is this hopefull pursuit of accuracy one of reliving the actual event or a surreal pipe dream of an occasion that never happened? Tom

Hello Gang. ASA, any Canada geese hanging out with the gulls there? Your Clear Side anology and its relationship with up stream and down stream components is bang on here. Yes...I do hear this attribute and you are correct in your analysis. I have employed the black Kenrads in my pre for that very reason. They do offer more of a textured soundscape and sound a little more organic in my rig when compared to most of the others. However, this does depend on the genre of music that I am listening to at the time, as well as amplifier choice[tubes in my case]. In my honest opinion: Ones choice of gain tube[6sn7]in the supratek is not a liabilty [per say],but a very flexible option to have when fine tuning with any given high resolution system . The Clarity of the supratek, will definitively allow one the abilty to hear the changes in the source,the componentry,wires,tubes etc,.An Example: the RCA redbase 5692 is far and away the tube of choice when used in my Luminescence B.....the Kenrad by comparison, would rank way down the list of nos tubes in that particular pre.Vice versa for the syrah[go figure]as mine does not seem to respond well to the 5622,at least in my rig. I have marched over [with my syrah in tow] to quite a few friends places [as well as a box of nos 6sn7's]and in every case, the syrah has removed a blanket of fog in each and every one of these systems[all very musical and high end by anybody'standards]By doing so,I have learned a great deal about the "voice" of the supratek and how it synergizes with different components. Example: One friend uses the Conrad Johnson MV-52 amplifier employed with nos mullard el-34's [beautiful little amp BTW]to drive JM labs model??? The Kenrad is "NOT the tube of choice in his system as we both preferred the syvania wgt's by a wide margin.The sound was a great deal tighter with the sylvanias in the syrah when listening to live blues and jazz. Another friend uses the meadowlark Shearwaters driven by mfa 120b monos in triode. These amps are running Genelex KT-88's and are wonderful sounding instruments. Here; the Kenrads sound incredible in the supratek.The stage is huge, literally holographic,with instruments and voices in full scale.A really enjoyable experience to be sure, made his Audible illusions 3a sound anemic,thin,and 2 dimensional.[Yes....he has ordered one] Prior to inserting in the syrah,his system was always very impressive in a "hifi sense" being that it resolved a heck of lot of imformation from the source with good dynamic range,great bass as well as clarity. I direct comparison with the Syrah, it sounds like good "hifi" but the Syrah gets you way closer to the event making the the 3a sound like its broken. I am a firm believer in getting the tonal balance right, first and foremost,then tuning the system to yeild as much resolution as one can achieve in a given room.The supratek is the heart and soul of each and every system I have heard it in! Enjoy.

Good morning everyone. Snowing here, 6 inches they say, or said...Chicago in winter. But last night, with only 12 hours until the storm hit, the meteorologists, who get their data from the NWS, a bunch of scientists, are now off on the timing of the arrival of the storm by 8 hours. How could they be so wrong, so close, with all of their advanced science and all? Does this pattern seem to be increasing, even as technology becomes more complex, or is it just me? A lot of gulls in the midwestern parking lots feeding at the edges these days, don't you think? Strange Attractors, in a turbulence theory sense, showing up in greater iterations?

On Krhys: I thought he was funny too. Yet, underneath, I know what he is saying, and it may be a little closer to what I've alluded to above, and to what Supra owners find when they purchase the pre and why they are actually here also. What could possibly be the connection between Kryhs's attacks (challenges?) and to what we have found, and the gulls for Christ sake?

Khyrs is sensitized to the fact that "science" -its toolmaking, the consequences its assumptions engender (and even though he may not see this in himself, be able to admit the heresy as yet) - will not necessarily give you the Answer. He swoops in, a missionary to help us see, to pierce our unreflective bubble, as he assumes. He's frustrated with the scientific true believers who adopt any piece of gear (scientific instrument) just because someone else has told them it will save them, give them beauty. But here, he's been mistaken; this group has found an instrument that produces "beauty" at a "good" value, relatively speaking; he has found the people that he wants the scientifically attached to be (again, even though, in the mirror of himself, he may still say he is whole bread "scientific").

So, basically he's more like us than he thinks (and you to him...). Here's a question, for Kryhs too: Do you think it was a coincidence that Kryhs landed here in his frustrated search? Hmmm...Welcome Krhys. And, yes, more funny please. Love the funny!

On Bob: Great Bob! Eccle, good point, how about this also: that the Supra is able to be inserted into many systems, yes, but also, thereafter allowing a long progression in the other components evolution around it? Some products, although great, have a "personality". Not just in their sound, but in how they intra-act with the rest of the system, both intially and as the system changes in toto. Some components "personality" doesn't show up right away; they can play with their neighbors fairly easily at first, but then, as other components move up to that level in quality, they become more "dominating." This can be very hard to hear and leads to much angst (and spending of money). I've found that over time, the Supra maintains its, for lack of a better word, personality and "suseptibility" to integration with other components over time. That is not to say that it does not have a sound, which brings me to...

Eccl, don't you think/hear that the Supra is on the "clear side" of harmonic complexity? I mean, it seems that the Supra, while neutral towards other components, itself seems to respond better to an increase of "lushness" (hence, the black Kens, etc.) in the core harmonic pojection than to a decrease in what people mistakenly refer to as "noise floor" of space? Noise floor seems acceptable to most here, but complexity in harmonic fabric seems to be what people are going after. Just an idea...

And this why, personally, I recommend it to many people who are at the place of making that jump from perfecting accuracy (usually at a place of overly euphonic tube pre mated to good SS amp and, er, neutral skr/IC wire, chosen to then balance back the other way) to "something more." They are at this balancing place, the merry-go-round place, but feel there is "something more"; can feel it in their bones but don't know how to get there. And yet, a too lush pre inserted into their advanced SS-sensitized ears sounds not "clear enough". The Supra seems to be a great "bridge" pre for many of these people to get the "accuracy" they intially value and, at once, not be scared off by too much euphonics, and yet still get a pre that does many of the things that tube guys talk about at the upper levels of tube systems. And, to boot, as said above, allows significant evolution of the system after that with minimal integration problems.

Just a few ideas, certainly I could be wrong, hearing things that aren't there, but I'd be interested in what some of you think as you've had it a while.

Thanks again for the talk. Incidentally, can anyone answer the unanswered gull part? Is it "inciden-tal, ie hopelessly tangental? Why are you so happy, and defend it so valiantly to Krys, with the "beauty" you found?

I know, I know, that Asa pie-in-the-sky bastard, off the thread again!! Hope springs eternal...

Tubegroover...Having just ordered a syrah pre... Mick tells me his start to finish time on the syrah is down to 5 to 6 weeks... I let Mick know that it wouldnt be an issue if it went beyond 6 weeks... keep happy and unrushed building mine...Tubegroover, you have a eloquent way of getting a point across , hopefully any new commer will read your great comments of 12-31-03...To all,health and happyness for 2004...

Will do. Tubegroover is nearby and has the Berning I mentioned as well as Merlins. We'll be comparing them for sure. Don't tell him I told you this but I will probably let him use it for a (little) while.

Jim

Let us know how you like that Joule, Jim. It would be interesting to compare and contrast it with the Syrah. I think Asa has one of each in two separate systems and loves them both, if memory serves. We all should be so lucky.

If I ever have the scratch for a second system, I will definitely try out the Joule. But my Syrah isn't going anywhere--unless Mick comes out with something better in my price range, that is. The latest iteration of the Cortese is awfully tempting, but just a tad out of reach...

I do not own the Supratek Syrah but I have heard it on more than one occasion in different rooms and with different amplification. Once was with the Berning and Merlin VSM speakers. Another was in my own home with both the Joule VZN80 and the Berning amp and my own Merlin VSM speakers. If a preamp can keep up with those components/speakers then it is pretty good. There is no doubt the Syrah is all it is cracked up to be. No way are you going to find anywhere else the performance, build quality, looks, and a phono stage in an all tube preamp for $2,500. If anyone knows of something better for the money please let me know. It is an absolute no brainer and based on what I have heard, makes spending a lot more money on a preamp a lot harder to do. Personally I am going to try the Joule LAP 150. Mostly because I expect (and hope) it will be better. It may not be. And I am very partial to the Joule equipment because it's works so well with my Merlins and sounds so good. And partly because I know of one available for a great price. If everyone were lucky enough to hear the Syrah they would have a much better frame of reference for performance and would likely save themselves a lot of money. Of course, Mick would also be backed up for years with orders...

Jim

Khrys...I will admit, at times in my life i have had fellings of insecurity and confusion... Other times i have strung human ears on a boot laces to validate numbers... You have been a laugh... Its time to move on...

Waltersalas, extremely well-said.

And beyond that, I am not sure why anyone here is wasting anymore time with Khrys. He obviously just wants to hear himself talk even if no one else does.