Mike82

Sheltie and Audio-Flynn: Don't worry. Both my wife and I were cops before going to grad school, and I am ex-military, so slack discipline "ain't gonna happen." We've found the right buttons to push when it comes to dealing with them.

Greg: The only thing I'm selling is the Khorns. All the electronics are staying and moving to my bedroom. I just need a different speaker for the time. A-Flynn: Thanks for the advice. I'll check out the website. The kids (brothers) came out of lousy environment. It's taking a lot of work getting them settled in- new school, church, etc.

Greg: Believe me, I thought about that, but when I saw how active a 7 and 9 year old boys are, the chances of my stuff getting smashed is pretty good. My gear is on a Grand Prix Audio stand, so it's in the open. I can see the 7 yo throwing his Transformer/Hot Wheel/GI Joe/fill in the blank and obliterating one of the 300B or knocking the CD t-port off the stand.

Paul: Not sure. It depends on which room I will be using for the new music room. For sure, it will be a hi-eff speaker since I want to stay with my SET amps. Maybe L-S, CW, Heresy.

After 23 years of marriage and no kids, my wife and I are adopting two young boys. They've been with us for a while and I forgot how active boys are. Anyway, in order to maintain my sanity, I'm going to make my music room into a playroom for them. The downside of this development is that I have to sell my Khorns. They are oiled 1985 walnut, w/ALK crossover. I am the second owner. They are in 8+/10 condition and sound great. I've caulked the mid and tweeter horns, woofer basket and rewired the speaker. I'm offering them here first. $2200. pick-up only. If you're paranoid, I can provide photos of the Khorns in a few days Mike Masztal michael.masztal@hartfordlife.com m.masztal@comcast.net

I've had KG4, Heresy and Heresy II in my place. Out of the three, I prefer the Heresy. The Heresy bass is not as deep as the KG4, but IMO, it is more natural sounding. The mids and highs were also better. I'd attribute this to the higher quality of the drivers used in the Heresy vs the KG4.

Dean: The DRD review is coming. I've been busy as heck lately and not had a chance to complete the review. I've also not been on the Forum much lately either. Max: I don't mean the Scott is thick and opaque in any absolute sense. It's a great amp. I only mean compared to SET, p-p, feedback designed amps will sound thick and opaque. Defining "Opaque" in audio terms. Hmmmm. First, I love tube amps of all types and grew up listening to my dad's Eico and Fisher units, so I don't have any objections to feedback designs. I currently have a Fisher 400 for my second system and enjoy it. I have owned several tube amps over the past 16 yrs: Quicksilver 8417, Audio Note P2-SE, Aranov 9100 (reviewed for SoundStage! and purchased after the review), Margules U280SC (SS review), Audiomat Arpege, Prelude Ref and Solfege Ref (SS review of Arpege, purchased after review and later sold in my shop), Art Audio PX25 SET (sold in my shop), Wyetech Onyx SET (sold in shop and personal use), Audio Note P1-SE, and Welborne DRD300. These were all great amps, but I still prefer the sonics of SET (with hi-eff speakers). I guess "opaque" could be described as a comparative lack of transparency, air, space, etc., in the soundstage. On certain recordings (mainly classical stuff which I listen to ~80%), using typical p-p, feedback designs, I can hear the music, timbre, etc., and get a decent 3-dimensional presentation of the orchestra, string quartet, etc, but with SET I can hear the acoustical environment of the concert hall, church or whatever. As to why, I can only speculate that this micro-detail/dynamics may be lost in the employment of feedback or even the tube design itself. For example, the Margules U280SC (6550 tubed) http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/margules_u280sc.htm has switchable ultralinear/triode modes. The triode wired mode is clearly more transparent and 3-dimensional than the UL mode. But a triode-wired 6550 (pentode) is not as transparent, etc., as a true triode. Neither is the single-ended EL84 powered Audio Note P1-SE as transparent as the DRD300B. Cary owners having amps with adjustable feedback can pipe in withe their experiences. So, whether it's feedback or tube design (pentode vs. triode), I prefer the SET over other tube designs. YMMV.

Gary: I guarantee you will have the same experience if you ever start listening to SET and go back to the Scott (or other pentode/tetrode design). Instead of sounding thin and lifeless, it will sound thick and opaque. JMHO

I agree with MDeneen, Loek and Max. The lower powered EC amps (AW25, AW60) were some of the best s-s amps I've ever heard, bur their newer, higher-powered amps aren't in the same sonic class.

I don't like the Yankees either, but I have to place the blame on the coach. Stupid sentimentality in letting Pedro continue to pitch cost them the series. Early in the game, my wife and I were saying-- Well, hopefully the coach watched the Cubs last night. Dusty Baker left Wood in too long--- That probably cost the Cubbies the NLCS. The same thing happened with the RS's Bill Buckner in '86. The guy was a gimp, but everyone liked him, so the coach let him play. A Mookie Wilson groundball, my mother-in-law could have fielded, went thru his legs and they ended up losing the WS. FOX is gonna be the big loser. Nobody except the Yankees/Marlins fans is going to watch this series. Had it been Red Sox/Cubs, a lot of non-baseball fans would have tuned in for that historical game.

The dynamic and timbral complexities of classical music are quite demanding. Sadly, 99% of the population's systems aren't really capable of reproducing classical music very well. That, plus the difficulty in finding good classical recordings, makes it a demanding hobby. Most people can easily listen to a "live" string quartet, but to try to listen to a qyartet over a mid-fi system can be comparable to having a root canal. Khorns with a good front end are a classical music lover's dream system.

Dean GMAFB! You've been on this Forum long enough to know that the current technology and methods of measuring components are not sufficient to "quantify" sonic attributes, therefore we have to use some other method to report similarities. In this case, subjective estimation. Read carefully. I used expressions like IMO (in my opinion), IME (in my experience), etc., to qualify my remarks. So, I'm sticking with 98%, not 97%.

Hi Leo/Erik: I bought a pair of DRD300B "Ultimates" about a month ago. I posted my initial impressions on the Forum which were quite favorable. After a long discussion with Ron, I went with the s-s rectified version. Besides, my DAC and pre-amp are tube rectified so I got 'enuf rectificashun' :-) For under $2K, you cannot come close to these in terms of performance. They are "ridiculously inexpensive". Mine has Black Gates which, IME, take a long time to fully break-in. Once I get some more hours on the DRDs, I'll post follow-up impressions. Sonically, they are extremely close to the Art Audio PX25 ($6000), which I used to sell when I had my audio shop. The PX25 is, IMO, the best sounding Art Audio amp. The DRDs have 98% of the transparency of the PX25 and maybe once they fully break in, may go neck-in-neck with them. For sure, the DRDs are dead quiet allowing for better low-level resolution. Regards, Mike

I knew there was a reason why I don't read this POS rag.

Before I got my Khorns, I had Belles. They were placed in corners along a 21' wall. My listening seat is about 13' back from the front wall. After playing around, I found the best sound with the Belles firing a tad to the outside of each ear, ie, the on-axis intersection was a foot or two behind my head. The corner placement also firmed up the bass a bit.