Who DOESN'T need high-end electronics?

[Deang]

Sounds like you got it all figured out - what do you need us for?

[Quiet_Hollow]

You know what I want, where should I go to get it?

I wouldn't expect to get imaging strictly out of an amp. Perceived image is stereo geometry, and the bulk of that is a product of correct placement, using symmetrically performing speakers, and mitigating room interaction.

I say "strictly" because the original signal also has to be considered. With mono, a stereo pair will simply pass the buck. Some mixes are ultra-wide, others not so much.

[Heritage_Head]

I don't agree with the "you get what you pay for" philosophy at all. In many cases paying more yields far less for the purchaser in my experience. Unfortunately, every manufacturer has a set of design goals which may yield a superior result in some, but not all, instances. And the higher price is often more a reflection of the cosmetics than the electronics (after all, does a person really need a front panel a quarter inch thick and milled from some exotic alloy?) As I said in the earlier post, it's all about synergy between the speakers and amp (and the best way to choose a power amp is to forget a preamp and drive it with an impedance compatible passive line stage through low capacitance, short, cables. Obviously, with an integrated amp that's not a variable.) Once the amp is chosen, then the preamp can be the next item in the chain. As Dean said, start with the speaker and work backwards. The other option is to find a custom amp builder (and, yes, they are out there) who will work with you to achieve exactly what you want to hear from your system by tweaking the operating parameters. And that doesn't have to be a costly way to go and, in many cases, can be less costly than buying commercial gear.

Maynard

The term you get what you pay for doesn't mean that if you spend 2k its automatically better than if you spend $500. It just means (to me) that if you buy the cheaper brand/model you will probably get a lesser product. That doest mean you cant get khorns used for 1500 and have speakers that are as good as 10k speakers. Its just a saying and should not be taken literally word for word. Sorry if it was.

[mike stehr]

I don't mind cheap old obsolete low-end electronics...

[Boomzilla]

I don't mind cheap old obsolete low-end electronics...

Those may have been "cheap" in the money department, but they're neither obsolete nor low-end! Wish I could hear them!

[Boomzilla]

Sounds like you got it all figured out - what do you need us for?

Alas, if I had it all figured out, I wouldn't be spending time posting on a forum - I'd be listening! I am beginning, however, to narrow the list of possible suspects for amplification. At the top of the "maybes" list is the Peachtree integrated. It has built in DAC, a switchable tube preamp stage, and is universally well-reviewed. My question is "does the Peachtree's class-D power amp section have the muscle to control the bass of the Cornwalls?"

Another idea that occurred to me was that if ATS panels on the walls controlled room echo, might an ATS panel (screwed onto the back of each speaker with the foam against the speaker's back) also control box vibrations on the Cornwall cabinets. I still think that at least some of the wooly bass I'm hearing from my Cornwall 3s is due to cabinet vibration. I have no idea how thick the back panel is, but it seems the largest of the panels on the cabinet. I'm sure that nobody has actually tried this idea (except maybe for Mr. Moray James), but is there any technical reason why it wouldn't work? It is minimally intrusive, doesn't destroy the future value of the speakers, and will be invisible from the listening position.

[stormin]

Point is, it isn't about money, it's about the sound. I don't expect electrostatic speed from my Cornwalls; I don't expect Magnepan transparency from my Cornwalls; I don't expect Theil imaging from my Cornwalls. What I do expect is realistic vocals, good detail from top to bottom, some soundstaging, and good bass. My definition of "good bass" includes a lower register that is tight, has good pitch definition, and goes deep enough not to need a subwoofer. These are realistic expectations for a speaker of the Cornwall's construction, design criteria, and size.

Tight? If you wanted tight you bought the wrong speaker. Some folks around here call the ole Cornwall a rumble box and I am one of them. It has alot of great characteristics but tight bass with good pitch definition describes a Chorus II not a Cornwall. IMHO.

[Quiet_Hollow]

I've been trying various types of equipment and loudspeakers for 40 years, and I always have a preference -- it's usually not even a challenging exercise to make the choice.

It might take five years and some money to get it right, but it's better than doing next to nothing and pretending you have a system that sounds as good as the person who sank some serious bucks into the hobby.

Sometimes, "next to nothing" is the right choice. The devil is in the details...most often, the seemingly minor ones.

[Deang]

That's messed up Mike. You're a gifted guy, so bringing that dead stuff back to life only makes it inexpensive for you - to someone who has to buy that stuff in good condition, or send it off to get repaired, it's anything but "cheap".

[Deang]

"Less is more until less is just less."

[Deang]

"It's not about the money", say the people who have tried sixty amps looking for synergy.

[Boomzilla]

"It's not about the money", say the people who have tried sixty amps looking for synergy.

And that's exactly correct. If it were about the money, I'd have just chosen the cheapest (or most expensive, depending on predilection), and been satisfied. If it sounds right, then it IS right (regardless of price).

[Deang]

I think you missed the point. What you ultimately decide on is irreverent. What matters is that you are spending quite a bit to find that "magical" combination. Now, when you're done you can sell everything off you don't want or need, but you'll take a bit of a beating when you do it. I know what you're going through, I've been there myself, and I can tell you based on 40 years of doing this that if you don't have a lot of disposable income - you'll settle for a nice modest system and tell everyone "it's not about the money"! This place drives me nuts. I used to hear the same stuff about crossovers - until I drove down south and showed the boys in Arkansas that I wasn't hearing things. Then I did it again in Indianapolis - and what did everyone learn - that less money produces superior results? Should have heard that top of the line stuff on the 60th Anniversary Klipschorns - almost sounded as good as a pair of Heresys and a chip amp - NOT.

[Boomzilla]

Thanks, I'm good at missing the point (unfortunately). I'm already selling off the "losers" of the race. Since I bought them all used via either Craigslist or eBay, the financial pain is not at all significant. In fact, I'm making a small profit on some of the equipment; but I digress...

So your point, in plain English, is that performance DOES improve with increased expenditure? I'd agree that expecting an inexpensive box to compete with cost-no-object equipment will produce the expected results every time. There are, however, products in the middle that are exceptional bargains for their cost. It's those I'm seeking.

Even if I fail to identify a bargain and end up having to pay top-dollar for top performance, I'm willing to do it. I just don't want to have paid top dollar and then found that I didn't get what I paid for. For example, one would expect that Krell electronics, based on their reputation and their house sound, would provide extremely tight bass with just about any speaker they meet. So would a Krell integrated amp turn my Cornwall "rumble boxes" into something else? Maybe; maybe not... If the problem is driver control, then yes, I'd expect the Krell to work its magic. If the problem is box resonance though, not even the Krell will be able to prevail.

That's why I'm "fishing the forum" for those with experience with the Cornwall 3 models. What electronics do YOU use? What are their strengths and weaknesses? If you had to do it again, would you buy the same electronics? What tweaks have you tried? Did they work? This is info that isn't readily apparent and that virtually NO "professional review" will ever mention. Only the owners have the experience to help. Again - I'm open to suggestions.

Thanks - Boomzilla

[Deang]

The Peach is a wonderful preamp. Also had a JM Merlin and thoroughly enjoyed it, too.

The Peach can run with solid state, the Merlin can't. This is why I told Stacy (sasquatch) in that other thread to "be careful".

[Quiet_Hollow]

This place drives me nuts.

Dean, please appreciate that not everyone has, can, or will share the same path as you.

You've got 40 years in the fold, I hear you, but if someone seriously took all the advice you had to offer, and applied it one single step, could you possibly spite them for not having put in the time like you have?

Right now there is a child with lots of free time growing up with a pair of 60th Anniversary Klipschorns to listen to (for example), who is going to have quite a different perspective on audio when he/she gets old enough to acquire their own stuff.

Think back to your RB-5. Now imagine if they had been something like La Scala or SH-50. How do you seriously improve on something like that? How do you feel starting from that point forward instead would've shaped your experience over the years?

[Marvel]

The Peach is a wonderful preamp. Also had a JM Merlin and thoroughly enjoyed it, too.

The Peach can run with solid state, the Merlin can't. This is why I told Stacy (sasquatch) in that other thread to "be careful".

Indeed, I am considering building a cathode follower buffer or spending some money on some good line level transformers. I actually like my Merlin a lot better than the BBX I had in the system for a while.

For me, it IS about the money. I haven't rolled through much gear, because I can't afford it, and so far, I've been happy at what I've ended up with. Then again, I'm really just a fly in the vineger jar. [] I'm happy to enjoy the system as is and not worry about it. It would probably drive others nuts.

Bruce

[Deang]

You have a nice system Bruce - top to bottom good stuff. I would consider a nice set of horns from Dave at this point (when you can swing it).

[Deang]

"Think back to your RB-5. Now imagine if they had been something like La Scala or SH-50. How do you seriously improve on something like that?" -- When I came to the forum I had just sold my Magnepan 1.5QRs. I was running the RB-5s with a Luxman M-117 and Anthem Pre 1L. I used an a/d/s sub to take care of the bottom. IOWs, it didn't exactly suck. Some people run LaScalas with an HT receiver. So, what do you think might sound subjectively better? Anyways, if I would have started with LaScalas, and knowing what I know now, I would have done the crossovers the way I'm doing them now, added another sub and started saving for better horns and drivers. Basically it would have just accelerated the process.

[mike stehr]

Yup, the Cornwall has it's own sound...some hate it, some don't. A retired EE friend always called mine the "Rough Ole Cornwalls". But I still like the sound of them, the rough sound seems to smooth out with tubes, IMO. Classic boom box sound.

Sometimes, a good coaxial is a fun thing to play with...