Jump to content

joshnich

Regulars
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2153

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by joshnich

    Russian Mullards

    in Talkin' Tubes

    Posted

    The Mullard brand was purchased by New Sensor the American company that also owns electro harmonix They own the factory in Russia where they manufacture both brands of tubes as well as gold lion. Reviews of the Mullard tube made by them have been very positive. 

    Vinyl - Record Spinning

    in Lounge

    Posted

    I rewired the tone arm with cryogenicly treated silver wire. Not a recommended endeavor! 

    Sounds fantastic but it was a *****! 

    In addition to the turntable built by Peter Reinders of PTP audio fame, I also built a turntable using parts supplied by PTP and done parts from a classic lenco. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    Vinyl - Record Spinning

    in Lounge

    Posted

    My turntable is a PTP audio 9. Built In the Netherlands with parts from classic Lencos. It is absolutely the most amazing turntable that I have owned - and I have owned a great number of them. It’s hard to describe how much better records sound compared to when listened on belt drive tables. And I mean any belt drive. It’s a different world for sure! Just saying! 

    • Like 4

    Why is this PASS design so cheap?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    On 5/12/2018 at 7:58 AM, jwc said:

    I know its china......but damn.  

     

    Another.....

     

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/PASS-AM-10W-10W-Class-A-Audio-Power-Amplifier-Hifi-AMP-Balanced-input/222153666558?hash=item33b963effe:g:mU8AAOSwNuxXYOiN

    I couldnt resist and bought one of these. It arrived earlier in the week and have to say it sounds awesome. Easily one of the best sounding amps that I have owned. I cannot comment on parts quality because I dont enough about them. I went to the builders ebay store and he has a wide variety of products based on classic designs from a clone of the EAR phono stage to clones of niam amps as well. I paid $299.00 plus shipping. But in his store I see what appears to be the same amp for 329.00 and 189.00. Maybe they are different but one wouldnt know from the photos or the listing.

    Cant comment on how long it will last but does it sound good.

    3OHEB6OmTlKtbRov3J2vBA.jpg

    • Thanks 2

    Show us your great photography thread!

    in Lounge

    Posted

    On 4/20/2018 at 9:26 AM, sputnik said:

    I went to grad school in Tucson.  Moved there after working in Alaska and just about died at first.  Everything there wants to hurt you - it's all either sharp and pointy or poisonous.  First time walking through the desert, I swore colla cactus balls could actually jump and attack.  By the time I left though I could mostly avoid trouble and was totally in love with the Sonoran Desert.  It was hard to leave.

     

    • Like 4
    • Haha 2

    Have You MQA'd?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    On 4/27/2018 at 10:13 AM, artto said:

    The Benchmark article is also about 2 years old. It demonstrates an even grosser misunderstanding of MQA. Right from the beginning it declares MQA DOA while comparing MQA to other (failed) "formats".

     

    Repeat: MQA is NOT a "format". MQA can be "packed" with any of the mentioned "formats".

     

    EDIT: perhaps "encapsulated" is a better description than "packed".

    I am sorry, but neither schiit nor benchmark are the idiots you make them out to be. In the case of benchmark, they manufacture equipment used in a great number of recording studios and certainly would have more than a "gross misunderstanding" of MQA. Your intimation  that John Siau does not know what he is writing about only proves your ignorance.

    I encourage others to read John's application notes on all things audio - all are available on the Benchmark website - and you will quickly understand why he is so respected in professional audio and recording arts.

    The fact that this application notes is two years old means absolutely nothing. If the science doesnt make sense two years ago it will not make sense today.

    Chris...I believe that you are a big fan of digital crossovers. I am not sure you read this portion of Johns notes on MQA

     

    "MQA Compatibility Issues

    MQA requires a lossless transmission system from the file source to the final D/A converter. Benign DSP processes such as a digital volume control (used in moderation) immediately defeat the MQA decoding. The same is true for digital crossovers, digital EQ, and room correction. The MQA stream will be corrupted if any of these common processes are encountered. These common forms of digital processing will shut down the MQA decoder and revert the system to a 44.1 or 48 kHz sample rate and an effective bit depth of 13 to 15 bits."

    Have You MQA'd?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    On 4/29/2018 at 12:30 PM, artto said:

    I've talked with Mark on several occasions and attended his seminars at AXPONA many times. He's a great guy. And I agree with his snake oil point of view regarding the majority of high-end tweak products. I have several of his recordings and his book. He has an entire chapter devoted to MQA.

     

    EDIT: On page 694 Waldrep writes about auditioning some MQA processed recordings at the 2015 CES show. These were presented by Robert Stuart of MQA. Bob Dylan:Don't Think Twice - "I can attest to the fact that I've never heard Bob Dylan sound that transparent and clear". Roberta Flack:Killing Me Softly - ""very present sounding, intimate and possessed the full frequency spectrum. The triangle and kick drum were especially precise and clear. The sound was really great."

     

    BUT - he admits that he hasn't had the opportunity to compare the same audio recording with/without MQA. And I might add, he is also guilty of repeatedly referring to MQA as a "format".

     

    However, much of his argument(s) against MQA has to do with re-releasing (again) existing (older) recordings that are not "hi-res" in the first place, similar to the HD downloads. And I agree with that (sorry analog guys, tape or disc, it ain't high resolution). Is MQA going to make that 1969 Led Zep album sound "better"? No. It's just going to give you what the stoned out of their mind producer/artist thought was best after 12+ hours a day of editing, mixing & mastering at ear blistering sound levels.

     

    The point being, if it isn't a high resolution recording in the first place, it doesn't require anything more than 44.1Khz/16 bit (or less), steaming or otherwise. The dynamic range isn't there. The noise floor is much higher.

     

    You can't restore what is not there. You can't alter what doesn't exist.

    Im confused. Both Dylan's Dont think Twice and Roberta Flack's Killing Me Softly were as far as I know, recorded on tape. Wouldnt they fall into the "if it isnt a high resolution recording it doesnt require anything more than 44.1/16"?

     

    • Like 1

    Have You MQA'd?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    11 hours ago, artto said:

    The Benchmark article is also about 2 years old. It demonstrates an even grosser misunderstanding of MQA. Right from the beginning it declares MQA DOA while comparing MQA to other (failed) "formats".

     

    Repeat: MQA is NOT a "format". MQA can be "packed" with any of the mentioned "formats".

     

    EDIT: perhaps "encapsulated" is a better description than "packed".

    And I have some speaker wire lifts to sell you 

×
×
  • Create New...