Mallette

I've alerted the DFW Klipsch Forum of your La Scalas. In fact, I asked them if there was anyone else in the group needing a center channel as I do...I'd definitely go for one if someone else took the other. What kind of amps are in there? Dave

Can't explain what you are hearing????? I think the thread title said it all...certainly got my attention. Just shipped my ST-70 to Frank Van Alstine today for rebuild. Don't expect as much as you got for it, but looking forward to it nonetheless. I've been lugging that thing around for 30 years. Dave

Study the turntables available on Ebay, then ask the list about specific ones that catch your eye. You can get quite a decent TT at 200.00. IMHO, 200.00 on a TT in a good system will provide you more enjoyment than anything else near the price. Dave

Doesn't sound crazy to me. I've a Cornwall between my 'horns. As explained above in this thread, it is driven through a Dynaco QD-2 at the moment. It helps a lot in my less than optimum dimension room. However, since I've a couple of amps around doing nothing I thought it might be interesting to be able to vary the volume of the center up some. I can turn it down now, but the effect is just there at max since it is a no gain circuit. I would like to test the idea that the Corny is just about 3 db too far below the 'horns to make a perfect passive match. In fact I've sort of suspected that PWK felt the same way. Hopefully, I'll settle this with a La Scala in the center in the not too distant future. In theory, I'd prefer the center be passive. We "2 channel" types just like to keep it simple. Thanks, Gil, for the Dope from Hope. Has everything there for what I was looking for. Hardhead: I note you are in the Dallas area. Would you be interested in the Dallas Area Klipsch Forum? Its pretty informal and we met here last. Next meeting is pretty soon at Jeff Savages house and promises to be butt kicken. I'll add you to the email loop if you are interested. Dave

Hifilit...new one on me. Great site. Not a lot of stuff, but what they have is really cool. First time I've seen "Grommes" in print. I had a Grommes "Little Jewel" as my first stereo amp. Wish I'd kept it. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-13-2002 at 10:19 AM

Hey Gil...any easy circuit for summing L+R at line level? While the QD is great for the rear channels, I'd prefer to use an amp with gain for the center in order to better match levels. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-13-2002 at 09:45 AM

The Dynaco QD is the cheap and pure way to go. I've used them for over 30 years. Just found a copy of the old DynaQuad demo record in mint condition in Florida a while back. Musically not overwhelming, but the FR separation is nearly as good as DD5.1, and FAR more musical given the lack of processing. Still consider it a shame Dynaco didn't have the clout to line up the big boys. Unless you had big bucks to spend, the 4 channel systems of the first era sounded AWFUL. PingPong stereo X 4 with a load of noise and artifacts. It would have changed the history of audio significantly. As it is, a mere footnote...but a footnote easily experienced for those who want both purity and depth as well in their music. As to your original questions, the current QD is also the safest and cheapest way to derive a center channel I know of. Just remember you need a speaker equal or more efficient than the LR's since there is no gain in the circuit. Dave

Too large, and I suspect, at least twice the mass I needed. I wanted something that was both just the right mass, as well as not being visible. I used many a penney in my radio days... Dave

Some of you may recall the resonance issue between my Grado and the SME 3009II arm. I managed to reduce it significantly by increasing tracking a bit. However, it recurred on an occasional LP. Since I had no ready source for weight inserts for the head, I McGyvered one. I took about a foot of thin solder, coiled it, and placed it in a stainless 1/4 tsp from the kitchen. I then melted it with a butane pinpoint lighter. It cooled nicely into a little puddle at the bottom and came out at about 2 grams. I then affixed it to the SME headshell with a dab of easily removable silicone sealer. This allowed me to balance with the heavier SME weight. Resonance completely gone, sound is excellent. Dave

Rather exhaustive listening test of the Pinnacle last night. I disconnected the CD/soundcard cable and the noise went away. Like I said, it didn't sound that good anyway. Found another interesting anomaly. When I switched to phono, all sounded fine even though the Dell server is sitting right next to it. However, when I put the needle down, I heard a low tone somewhere between 500-700 hz that rose and fell in amplitude slowly. This could also be produced simply by touching the stylus. Shut down the Dell, no such sound. Strange. Well, a bit of a nuisance but I don't listen to CD and vinyl at the same time anyway. As to the Pinnacle, I played back Don Henley, more Pomp and Pipes, Eagles, Nitty Gritty Dirt Band (Will The Circle...CD reissue), Harry James King James Version, Stan Getz, Ottmar Liebert, CCR, Dallas Symphony Gershwin album, Tito Puente from the HDD. All much, much improved. While the sense of "diet" music is still there, that which remains is much more musical and listenable than I've heard in the past. I am even more convinced that computer/HDD/high end soundcard is the path to CD excellence for those of us on a budget. Further, the convenience of WinAmp in a vintage system is neat. Able to mute, change volume, build playlists, etc. all from my listening position with a wireless keyboard. Using the magnify button on my ScanDo allows me to get WinAmp up to easily readable size on the screen. Since the Dell has easy slide-out room for 4 more HDD's, plus the removable drawer I installed, I think I can house all my CD's there. Still looking forward to the Card Deluxe. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-08-2002 at 11:43 AM

OK, so somebody has to come out of the woodworkd with something compelling, sexy, right up my alley, and in my price range. Those Paramours are excessively cool. Had no idea there was anything in the rarified world of SET at this price. Still, I've this ST-70 I've been hauling around... May get the rebuild, use it for awhile, then see if my mind wanders toward the SET world. I am sure I could get most of the money back on Ebay. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-08-2002 at 10:34 AM

Unless my math is wrong, there is significant difference between 600.00 and 1100.00. Bill Barista brought a VT70i over at the last Klipsch Forum get together. Awesome. Love it, espcially the little blue bias lights. However, I doubt I'd hear much difference between it and the Van Alstine rebuild. Great musci so overwhelms me that I can't really distinguish between zip cord and 8 guage solid gold. The one working channel of the original sounded pretty darn good. Besides, I've been lugging this puppy around for 30 years...kind of attached, I guess. Dave

Well, there isn't much hope for playing direct from the CD drive. Connected a direct connection to the sound card and got a crappy buzz. Level isn't that high, but too high. Thought it might be convenient for BG music and the PAW when she wanted to listen to something not yet transferred to HDD without having to rip it. Well, the DAC's in the drives are total crap anyway. Suppose I can live without this... Wish someone would write software for direct playback through the card. If you can rip a file, you should be able to play it without the cable. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

Due to a bit of good fortune, I've obtained just enough cash to have Frank Van Alstine rebuild my ST-70. Not a minute too soon...the old HK Citation 12 is about to drive me nuts with SS sound. Franks's price is 589.00. I'm not going into the details here as they are available at http://www.avahifi.com if you are not familiar and wish to render an opinion. However, the work is extensive. As my preamp is an AVA Super PAS4i, this makes sense. Frank himself suggested I buy the kit and do it myself, but the savings are less than 200.00 and I want it done right the first time. Thoughts? Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-07-2002 at 10:23 AM

I intend to acquire a Card Deluxe next month to use on a recording gig I have in September. It will go in the Dell with the Pinnacle. I'll be using a 1936 RCA BK3A and two Beyer ribbons to record a piano quintet. After that, it'll be doing the CD honors between gigs. I was quite surprised to hear such an audible improvement from the Pinnacle. It is still quite highly regarded as well, just between the top level SB's and just below the CD. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

The Card Deluxe is the one $tereophile compared favorably to the 15,000.00 Mark Levinson DAC. 399.00 ain't bad for that kind of performance, IMHO. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

I don't know about the Santa Cruz, but I had two other Turtle Beach cards that really sucked. The Pinnacle is a different animal. Don't know how they could make such crappy cards except for this one. It is MUCH superior to my 5.1 SB Live. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

Just quit a session having built up a new audio computer using my old Turtle Beach Pinnacle sound card. What a change from the SB Live! As I've said in the past, I've had little opportunity to hear any high end CD players, and have never owned anything but Yer Basic Brand CD Player. It's been my theory that it takes really excellent electronics (compared to analog) to make the CD listenable. This is born out by my experience with the Pinnacle today. I immediatetly heard a vast improvement in resolution and musicality. Spent time with Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, Medieval Babes, the Ventures, Pomp and Pipes, and Michael Murray (pipe organ). Awesome. Can't wait to see if the Card Deluxe is as much better than the Pinnacle as the P is to the SB. Perhaps there is hope for this medium after all. BTW, I put this one in a Dell Pentium 450 server. Thing was 300.00 delivered and has an ultra wide SCSI adapter and pull out drawer for 5 drives. Very quiet. Unbelievable. Bet it cost 4,000.00 about 4 years back. Everything you need for a CD player, and more... Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 08-05-2002 at 07:20 PM

I've always been of the opinion that plain 2 channel stereo is mostly 2 dimensional. Most of the arguments of the 2 channel forever crowd center around the unnatural nature of multi-channel schemes. I concur with this, as I've heard them all and even the best sound forced or worse. OTOH, simply extracting what is already present is no more unnatural than a passive preamp, and truly enhances the listening experience for me. In short, the arguments against more than 2 channels are really no more or less valid as those against 2 channel itself. After all, there are still a few luddites who prefer mono and have reasonable arguments (mostly just like the 2 channels only crowd) in support of their position. I listen to a lot of mono, but certainly prefer stereo and passively extracted rear channels. Like you, I am surprised at the lack of interest from the audiophile community in the Hafler circuit. Seems like a natural. I suspect that it is too much for the 2 channel crowd, and too little for the multi-channel bunch. Thank God it can be obtained without fancy circuits and such! The DynaQuad demo I obtained recently has the basic circuit on the back, though I'd like to know how they get the center channel. Bridges generally seem to be expensive, but this one appears to work very transparently and very cheaply. BTW, is it possible to simple split the output of a preamp with a Y, then sum it to get a line level center for amplification? I'd like to try this with a Mac 2100 I have idle at the moment to see if the center Cornwall would sound better with the efficiency more closely matched to the 'horns. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

I have to remember to have the volume down when I boot the PC that has a SB Live! Platinum in it. The thunder effect for logon is most impressive. I also found the steam engine on the DynaQuad demo LP acquired recently and discussed in this forum at least as impressive as the 30 year later THX engine. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 07-31-2002 at 11:21 AM

I am not familiar with the QD-2. I am currently running a QD-1, which at a recent check was still available from the current holders of the Dynaco name. It has a center channel output and costs around 90.00. Heckuva deal for a purist wanting to get all the info out of his recordings. I still have my original DynaQuad, but it does not have a center tap and the screws are quite small and difficult to get wires under. However, I really miss the null balance of the original...very handy for set up and fool proof. For Hafler to work well, the speakers really have to be pretty close in efficiency, if not in type. My rears are Frazier Monte Carlos and just barely make it in the efficiency category with the front horns. My center is a Cornwall which is sufficiently less efficient than the horns to be noticable. I hope to replace it with a La Scala at some point. While DVD-A is in my future, I imagine I'll give SACD a pass. Too expensive for the limited repertoire (and probably lifespan). While I've not heard any modern recordings mixed for surround, I've heard plenty of movie soundtracks. They sound quite manipulated and forced compared to the natural sound of the Hafler experience. I really think a lot of audiophiles would go for Hafler if they heard it under the right conditions. Further, even a moderately savvy person could wire this, and even build a small board with a volume control. Not quite sure (I am "moderately savvy) how the null balance worked, but it would be nice to add. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh' Klipsch! This message has been edited by Mallett on 07-31-2002 at 09:14 AM

If I understood the guy from the company who makes the laser turntable correctly, the signal is pure analog all the way. The only conversion is from the analog modulated laser to current. Granted, that is an extra stage from normal pickup, but it's still analog. I suppose none of us knows what would be involved there, but it certainly seems like it should be a lossless process if done correctly, and the signal should be of far greater bandwith than the best mechanical pickup concievable. Just uninformed speculation... Dave Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

...is coming home to them big 'ol horns! I knew they'd be there...how many K'horns have ever been burgled? Try fitting one of THOSE$ in your sack! First thing I dropped on the table was "The Best of Louis Armstrong," AFSD 6132 picked up on my trip. Man! Awesome performance and recording. Best "St. James Infirmary" I've ever heard. A "Hot Time in the Old Town Tonight" indeed. "Chimes Blues" exciting beyond belief. I feel SO deeply for those who become bored with their systems and need to throw money at them. Feed'em a great LP and the excitment is back, unless you just really don't like music. Anybody know what the Frey "Stereophonic Curtain of Sound" technique was? That is what the Audio Fidelity liner notes say was used. Works for me. I am certain Louis was singing in to an RCA BK3A or one of the DX ribbons. He was right THERE. Also hooked up the Sony ST-3950 tuner. Much improved over the Rat Shack in sonics, sensitivity, and appearance. There is NO space between stations...many more than I knew existed. Of course, mine stays pretty much stuck on WRR, our local classical (commercial, no less, and profitable) station which is quite fastidious about it's signal. Could locate anything on this tuner in my too small collection of old equipment directories, but I suspect it was fairly pricey. Heaviest tuner I've ever seen. Well worth 39.00. It's great to be home! Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

I rather doubt I ever heard QS, SQ or the JVC systems under good conditions. The only decoder I ever owned was a Sansui QS purchased used in the 70's. It was so hissy I couldn't stand it. I am not familiar with the H/K system you mentioned. However, my main point was that rear channel information occurs naturally and can be recovered naturally. Anything else is unneccessary and ultimately unsatisfying from a musical standpoint, IMHO. I have several QS and SQ disks, including the Gabrieli with the Philadelphia, Chicago, and one other brass ensemble in four corners, and the Biggs plays the four organs of Freiberg Cathedral. All exhibit some degree of four channel sound with the DyanQuad. I just picked up a copy of the Biggs while in Florida in the plain release. Looking forward to back-to-back with the SQ to see if there is a detectable difference...I doubt it, frankly. I suppose it follows that a "2 mic, never mix or process" guy would also embrace this minimalist approach to 4 channel sound, but my ears tell me it is the only approach that adds or subtracts nothing from what is already there in the first place. What do you (HDBR) think about my comments on CD through passive extraction? Perhaps just my bias (which seems to increase daily)? Don't know, but I certainly hear less from them. Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'

Out of the stack of LP's I obtained during my Klipsh-free vacation, I expected little except curio interest from the DynaQuad disk I found. What a surprise...and what a lesson!!! The first cut, a "Flight of the Bumblebee" on the Moog, blew my mind. Discretely all over the place, and so much more natural and musical than the best 5.1 I've ever heard. Dolby ProLogic and Digital is SO mechanical compare to this. It's the surround sound comparative to multimic and mixdown. I've always found two mic stereo to be generally preferable to any remix multimic recordings, and this did for me in surround sound what years of listening to various mic setups did for me. Some of you have probably read in my posts that I've used a Hafler passive rear channel system for 30 years and fully enjoyed it. At minimum, it provides a deptha and fullness that two front speakers just can't match. On heavily mixed albums like classic rock or Firesign Theatre, the effect is downright startling. But when the record is made purposefully with stronger out-of-phase signals, like in this Dynaco demo, it is downright AWESOME! It is that which lays to rest the 2 channel argument, as it is only two channels. However, with the passive circuit installed, it is a revelation...and still unprocessed and ungimmicky. For the life of me I will never understand why they messed around with QS, SQ, and the discrete JVC (I think) encodeing systems. They never sounded anymore "natural" than the even more processor dependent Dolby system. We could have had surround for both audiophiles and regular listeners 30 years ago! No extra bandwith needed. I recall that Dyna even made a little device to be used in the car...bet those are rare artifacts, indeed!. Wish I could find one! I may even try wiring the circuit in my van. The steam engine that follows the Bee cut is every bit as 4D as that used on the Dolby Theatre trailer...with a lot less circuitry and gimmicks to make it happen. The next three cuts are Buffy Sainte Marie, Ian and Sylvia, and Country Joe and the Fish. Each completely musical, seamless, and completely enveloping. I like Dynaco's characterization of this as "4 Dimensional Stereo." It is not a contradiction in terms, but a fact. The classical stuff on the back has this depth as well, but I found the recordings a bit edgey. I suspect they manipulated the mono and stereo cuts of Messiah to make them sound worse...damn shame, since no such subterfuge was really necessary. Bottom line...natural is best. We could have avoided a lot of needless Quad wars back there that resulted in no winners, and had a much more natural and gimmick-free surround system if Dyna had more clout. I wonder if they held the patent too closely or something for the others to have gone to all the trouble and expense of getting it wrong, when right was SOOOOO simple. The upside is that the Hafler circuit does so much good for any analog source even when not optimized for it. I say analog because I've noticed the effect is not so profound on digital sources. I do not see why, since there should be out-of-phase info there as well. I wonder if a lot of the o-o-p info that provides the "steering" is perhaps in the very high freqs not present on CD? I probably won't sell anyone on this as it is politcally incorrect for the 2 channel crowd, and not technically challenging enough for the DD5.1 bunch. It was damn sure a revelation for me... Dave ------------------ David A. Mallett Come taste muh'