Fidelity Research FR-64 vs. FR-54

Dear @lewm : You only see my posts but don't really " read " it:


"""  urious that you named the MAT02 and totally " weird " that you think I’m used in the Essential.

That matched bipolar pairs along the MAT03 were used in the late 80’s by ML and even that are good devices are not what we were looking in our near " perfect " Essential design and that’s why we took a very hard very hard task to choose individual discrete bipolars and not only that but we choosed/tested diferent manufacturers where even that almost all were made it the same did not sounds exactly the same. After the choice the hardest task was to have matched pairs that we can’t do it by our self, this task was responsability of a México University. No, not all similar bipolars sounds the same. Yes, it's more easy to handkle and to design a circuit with MAT kind of devices than single discrete bipolars, remember that single discrete bipolars has not the very high gain in the MATs and that was an additional issue to solve in the Essential design. """

"""  we don’t use it any single chips in the circuit not even the discrete ones but the B&B buffer """


R.

Dear @dover :   """  you might want to look at eliminating the circuit boards...."""


it's obvious that you have no single idea of the very high level of our design where it's not posible to even think on that.

Did you know that almost any single electronic designs has high or/and low frequency oscilations? that the designers was not aware off. Did you took note of the Essential extremely wide frequency range?, I think only the Spéctral is down there. These and other critical design issues in our targets preclude simplistic kind of design with a few parts. Our design prevents almost everything a skilled designer can imagine, it's a bullet proof design. Not like your LOMC stage. Yes, even that our design is a non-State of the Art one it surpass yours by a wide margin, no doubt about. problem is that you can't understand this and that as always you are only trying to hit me but you know what: you just can't do it because my shield against it is your self ignorance levels that is different from my self ignorance one.

Btw, please read carefully this thread's information about the first Essential version:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/experience-with-raul-s-essential-3150?highlight=essential%2B3...

of those gentlemans only A.Porter and F.Crowder listened the 3160 ( third version. No one but me the fourth that only I owns. ). I was at their places twice.

This one is part of the gentlemans that heard the 2nd version:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/experience-with-raul-s-essential-3150/post?postid=326270#3262...

The best of all those was and is the whole experiences I had meeting extraordinary people/human beens, whom gave me their precious time and their family time too !!!  !!!!

Por that THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU, again.


No one try to hit me as you.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC not DISTORTIONS,
R.

Why know I that you once and again try to hit me with out success?, because you can't resist the temptation to post again  those you tube links that you made it expressely to do that years ago.

And you posted here in this thread even that many time ago, when you did it the first time, I explain ( trhough an Agon post. ) in precise way that that picture that shows the cartridge mounted in its dedicated headshell was only to use it in my ad for sale Agon listing. As a fact you took it from that ad.

I never mounted the 13D in my system with that headshell: never.  

You already knew this but your very high frustration levels with me provoque that non-mature attitude from your part. Pity.

I explain ( trhough an Agon post. ) in precise way that that picture that shows the cartridge mounted in its dedicated headshell was only to use it in my ad for sale Agon listing.

Raul, why would you mount, advertise and sell a cartridge mounted incorrectly in its dedicated headshell upside down. Do you sell your Essential preamp with the channels reversed inside the preamp for fun too ?  

I never mounted the 13D in my system with that headshell: never.

Therefore you posted a review of this cartridge without having listened to it in the Dynavector recommended proprietary headshell, hardly an authoritative review. Furthermore check slide 3, it is mounted incorrectly in your tonearm. Tell me, how do you review cartridges - do you just look a them. And of course you pass a review on a cartridge you have never heard - your Dynavector 13D had a non standard cantilever bearing no resemblance whatsoever to the original.
Raul, if you read my posts more carefully you may find the path to exceed your AHEE status and move up to my level. I am well past the cognitive development stage and am now at the AHAA level.

Cheers   

Btw, please read carefully this thread's information about the first Essential version:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/experience-with-raul-s-essential-3150?highlight=essential%2B3....

of those gentlemans only A.Porter and F.Crowder listened the 3160 ( third version. No one but me the fourth that only I owns. ). I was at their places twice.

Dear Raul, are you trying to pull out names of well-respected members of this forum to support your views? If so, it is such an irony that you picked these 2 gentlemen to mention. Just look at what equipment they are using right now!

It is especially interesting that you mentioned Mr Porter, to whom I must give thanks to for his invaluable advice on Aesthetix equipment. By looking at the date of the post (2006), he probably was using the Signature version of the Aesthetix at the time, as the updated version, which he got later, came out in around 2009.

So, after auditioning your phonolinepreamp, he stayed with the “tube 30's alternative” (your words, not mine). He changed to the IO and Callisto Eclipse later, and then changed to the Allnic. It is interesting that the Allnic is using tubes of even older designs (if I am not mistaken) than the Aesthetix!

Also, I have reread the whole thread above, and it seems to me that no one participated in that thread shared you view of tubes being inferior to SS. Even an owner of your phonolinepreamp was (and still is, I believe) using tube amp. Yes, some preferred your phonolinepreamp over some other models of tubed designs, but the opposite was also true.

>I reserve my opinion about the Essential 3150 quality sound reproduction against not only the Aesthethix one but about any other phonolinepreamp. This not belongs to my targets and I'm not the right person to do it because the Essential 3150 is an important part in the José and my life and we could have some bias in favor of the Essential 3150.<

I have also found your comment above in that thread. Looks like you have changed you mind regarding:
“I reserve my opinion about the Essential 3150 quality sound reproduction against not only the Aesthethix one but about any other phonolinepreamp. This not belongs to my targets and I'M NOT THE RIGHT PERSON TO DO IT .......and we could have SOME BIAS in favor of the Essential 3150.“ (my emphasis by capitalization), since then!

Dear Raul, I read your post of 4:51 PM on March 19.  In that post, you merely quote your earlier post.  What am I supposed to take away from that?  Your post prior to mine seemed to say that you match discrete transistors in order to create the balanced circuit in your Phonolinepreamp.  I responded that it must be very tedious to match transistors for a balanced circuit, by hand. I now realize that maybe you were saying that you DO use bipolar transistors (which contain two very closely matched active devices in one case) but that the ones you use are specially selected for you by a lab at Mexico University.  Is that what you meant?  And why should I think that this makes the 3150 unbeatable?  Why must you then also throw in the insult that my system is not good enough for the 3150? You've evidently sold units to others with tube amplifiers, if that's the kernel of your disdain.