Deang

I will sleep on it. I have just enough money left to do this. I will need to find an old clock radio first I don't know about going to the inmates for help - they love to crucify people. This message has been edited by deang on 02-07-2002 at 04:29 PM

...speaking generally can at times be very misleading. Let's take the following statement: "Tubes sound better than SS" Yesterday I found out that this isn't always true. Being perfectly happy with what I had, I decided to 'upgrade'. Since I'm doing almost as much time with the DVD player (movies) as I am with CD's - I decided I wanted to get a little more slam and transient attack back into my system. I purchased both a Bryston 3B-ST amp and BP-20 preamp off of AudiogoN. The original plan was to roll the tubes in my Anthem Pre1L and mate it with the 3B-ST. When the BP-20 showed up on AudiogoN I more or less bought it out of curiosity, and figured it would be easy enough to sell off if I didn't like it. The Bryston preamp showed up today, and I spent my lunch break swapping out the Anthem with the Bryston. I fired everything up and let the Amp1 warm up for about 20 minutes or so before I started a CD. So what we have at this point is a SS preamp mated to a middle of the road tube amp running stock Russian EL34's, a pair of Sieman 12au7's, and a stock Chinese 12ax7. Now the way folk talk in general, (and I am actually exluding the likes of Mobile, Colin, and many others on this board who I am sure know better) - you would think that even a middle of the road tubed preamp would sound better than any or most SS units. However, that's not what I found. In a way, I wanted the Bryston to sound bright and grainy so I could justify going to the next level - what I found was a smooth, effortless, open, and natural sounding treble. The bass was obviously tighter and there was less 'glare' at the higher SPL's. The unit is obviously a better sounding unit than the Anthem Pre1L. It probably doesn't sound better than the superior tubed offerings - but it certainly sounds better than the Anthem. I guess I can't be sure a retube wouldn't have pushed the Anthem over the top - but the Bryston does very, very good with the Amp1. The 3B-ST should be showing up within the next week and I really have no idea what to expect. I have heard there is a special synergy between the BP-20 and 3B-ST and that is what I am hoping for. Whatever the outcome - I'll be back either to whine or shout praise. later, Dean This message has been edited by deang on 02-07-2002 at 04:18 PM

Wish I knew how to read a schematic - it would be fun to do something like this. Looks like a lot of amp for the money - probably sounds sweet. Don't know what to think about those Lowthers. Seems like there would be gobs of IM distortion. ------------------ deanG

...have 24 bit/96 khz oversampling i mean - cd's always playback at 44.1 so why the 96 khz spec? ------------------ deanG

If I were doing multichannel I would definitely split up my amps. Get a 2 channel for the mains and a three or 5 channel (if doing 7 total) for the rest of it. I don't know what to think when a 5 channel amp weighs as much as most decent 2 channel amp. Also, do not buy new. Use www.audiogoN.com - slightly used gear can be had for less than 1/2 the money and allows you to really stretch your money. I could not afford Anthem or Bryston new - but I managed to get both shopping at AudiogoN. ------------------ deanG

Gentlemen prefer blondes... Mine are coming in maple ------------------ deanG

But wait!! Change out your amp Get a tube amp Get new tubes Get a tube preamp Get new tubes Change your cables Get a turntable Get room treatments Get thicker furniture Get thicker carpet Get new speakers ------------------ deanG

Am I the only poster on this board that prefers two ways? ------------------ deanG

Mobile It is odd that you would center your whole post around the point of less being more and at the same time say for a few hundred more I could have had a 4B-ST. The 3B-ST is 120 watts, which I am sure you will agree is more than enough. Actually, 4B-ST's are going for roughly $1500 - which is actually $500 more than I spent (or was willing to spend). It would have actually been a waste for me to spend an extra $500 for power I really don't need. Now that I got that out of the way - I can tell you without any doubt that if you knew my music tastes and my listening habits - the last thing in the world you would recommend to me would be 25 wpc I'm no expert - but it seems to me that even an RF7 could benefit by being driven by an amplifier that has plenty of reserve power. ------------------ deanG This message has been edited by deang on 01-30-2002 at 08:58 PM

Sorry, I just can't deal with the Monarchy's asthetics. It's also kind of wimpy at 25 wpc. Colin's post got me digging and I found it impossible to find a bad word about the Bryston 3B-ST. Then God help me I started thinking about Ears. So...I just bought a 3B-ST at AudiogoN for $1000 even. I'll mate her with my Anthem tube preamp and see what happens. ------------------ deanG

actually...i wouldn't consider the ksw series necessarily 'musical' - i see them more as decent HT subs. The ksw's rumble just fine - it's tight, articulated sound that they lack. You might want to start saving for a RSW10, 12, or 15 ------------------ deanG

1) Is it worth upgrading to the RF-7s from the Quartets? Yes, most definitely 2) Should I maybe go for an RSW-12? yes, most definitely 3) Are the Quintets inadequate for surround speakers? They would do for now 4) Should I go to a KSC-C1 center channel? No, you want all the speakers to be timbre matched. You will want the RC7 for the center channel. Whether it is worth upgrading is totally up to you. No one here can place value on that for you. Most of us here are continually upgrading. It's a disease. ------------------ deanG

As usual Colin you come through with a really great post. Aren't we supposed to buy amps buy the pound - or is that a bunch of B.S. The 3bst only weighs 22 lbs. By contrast the B&K 2140, which has roughly the same wattage - weighs 8 lbs. more. Sure wish I knew more about amps. I guess you get what you pay for ------------------ deanG

I'm going to pick one up for $1000 or a little more my choices are as follows: Adcom 5802 Aragon 8008ST NAD S200 any opinions? other choices ? tubes just don't get it for HT ------------------ deanG This message has been edited by deang on 01-29-2002 at 07:55 PM

I wouldn't worry about Ears - he's pretty resilient ------------------ deanG

read the C.M.M.D. White Paper here: http://www.infinityspeakers.com/home_audio/technology.asp ------------------ deanG

oosting - talk about 'stretching' When I first got my RB5's one of the woofers had what you describe fresh out of the box. It was obviously something that happened at the factory during assembly. Maybe it was someone like Ears flipping their interconnects around The metal is cut/punched out and considering the thickness of the material to begin with, I find your 'stretching' explanation hard to accept. The tool probably goes through the material like butter. When I had my RB5's I drove them to ridiculous levels and the drivers never looked like they were ready to jump out of the cabinet - which is about what would have to happen to cause a cone to buckle. As a matter of fact - I doubt it could happen at all. Imagine trying to apply your assumptions to the RSW15. Ears - as far as the veneer goes: veneer thickness is pretty much standardized and like any piece of furniture utilizing it - if you hit it with something sharp, it will go into the MDF. Sub $500 mass market speakers use vinyl exclusively. ------------------ deanG

Good post - I didn't know that. I wonder where the ceramic bit comes in at. It would be nice if there was more data on the drivers. Maybe the folks at Monitor Audio can shed some light on it. "Due to the metal cones' ultra -rigid nature, there is less cone flex and breakup occurring compared to conventional cone materials. The metal cones reproduce sound with near ideal pistonic motion, resulting in unsurpassed detail and transparency." Or better yet - BobG - where in the hell are ya when we need ya. ------------------ deanG This message has been edited by deang on 01-26-2002 at 02:33 PM

you got that right ------------------ deanG

There will be more bass than the Heresy's - much more. RP5's will not be as dynamic as the Heresy's, but will still have considerable punch. The RP5's will sound warmer by comparison. I would probably prefer the RP5's over the Heresy's. That doesn't mean anything though because there are plenty here who would prefer the Heresy's over the RP5's. Think of it as ear candy. They are both sweet in a different kind of way. If your brother really likes the Heresy's - why not just find some used ones on eBay? This message has been edited by deang on 01-26-2002 at 02:09 PM

mobile - you are pretty much never wrong about anything but this time you screwed up. It's the music. ------------------ deanG

Boa - who says this isn't rocket science? Yeesh. Glad I'm just two channel. Seb - yes, just about all the 40Hz stuff is still there. ------------------ deanG

Most subs have both the fixed high pass and the adjustable low pass. Now I don't have any experience with receivers, but I would imagine the receiver is simply a low pass crossover, which if used - would necessitate you flipping the low pass on your sub to off or inactive. You should use one or the other but not both. The fixed high pass at 80Hz is the most common because 80Hz is the THX standard. 6db/octave for the high pass is also fairly common. With a 6db/octave slope you will be -3db at 40Hz. Where you set your low pass at this point is totally subjective based on room boundary effects and personal preferance. I always seem to think 50Hz sounds the best. Now, another option is to not use the high pass at all, but simply run the RF7's full range for music - and only turn the sub on for HT. Just set the low pass on the sub as low as it will go. There will be a little overlap - but hey, it's movies and little extra rumble between 30 & 40 Hz ain't exactly something to get all worked up about. The reason I make this suggestion is because many people (including me) believe running the whole signal through a crossover before going to your amp is less than ideal. In other words - there is certainly going to be some signal degradation. Others argue that it's actually cleaner because since the woofer(s) of the mains are freed up from playing low bass - there is less IM and THD. What I have actually found is that with monitors, using the high pass sounds better than not using it - but with full range speakers, it sounds better not using the high pass. If you plan on listening to alot of multi-channel music - you will probably be better off using it. ------------------ deanG

I try to keep my speakers out of the rain ------------------ deanG

I ended up having to down size a little and went from two systems to one. My wife is home schooling the kids and we had to make more room for 'stuff'. So I sold some stuff, upgraded to the RF7's and moved everything upstairs. When I get home from work, Temple, my 18 month old daughter - grabs me by my finger and pulls me around the dining room table and starts pointing up the stairs. "uh", "uh", she says - which I assume means 'up'. She now gets upstairs and knows which buttons on the CD player starts the music. She recently figured out how to skip tracks. Her favorite CD is Tears for Fears. There is simply no greater pleasure for me than watching her sway back and forth to the music. It's like watching a living music box. ------------------ deanG