WMcD Posted July 8, 2002 Share Posted July 8, 2002 I'm in agreement with Clewless, in principle. I can't see any technical reason why power conditioners should help things. More accuately, that there is anything to help. I just can't believe that the power supplies in our amps don't do a good job. And also, from day to day I sometimes hear a difference in a given system, but know it is just my perception. On the other hand, this seems like a "wire" issue. No one can come up with valid measured differences, no A-B-X tests. Yet honest people have strong opinions. - - - - In the hotel problem. The owner has collected $30 and returned $5 and has, therefore $25 in the cash register. The guests have paid 30 total and been returned $3, for a total payout of $27. The boy has $2. Therefore, all money is accounted for. - - - The paradox of Zeno is about the foot race between fast Achilles and the slow turtle. The turtle is given a head start of, say, a meter. No units of measure are given, typically, but I'll do so here. The paradox is not difficult to debunk. After the start, Achilles moves to the 1 meter mark. That turtle has moved ahead to the 1.1 meter mark. The turtle is ahead. Achilles then moves to the 1.1 meter mark. The turtle has then moved to the 1.2 meter mark. The turtle is ahead. Achilles then moves to the 1.2 mark and the turtle has moved to the 1.3 meter mark. It is still ahead. The argument is that Achilles can never catch up to the turtle. By the observation forced by the paradox, we're looking at shorter and shorter periods of time interval. It is all compressed into time before when Achilles passes the turtle. - - - - Book keeping and philosophy are not exciting (or wonderously debatable) if done properly. Maybe Audiophilia too. Regards, Gil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted July 8, 2002 Share Posted July 8, 2002 Always count on unique responses via the Klipsch forum, and the General Questions sector seems to bring out the most.....ummm....unigue. By the way, Andy W, do you know how your typical solid state amp gets such vanishingly low amounts of Total Harmonic Distortion? It's called global NEGATIVE FEEDBACK which can be quite the bad thing when given in the doses needed to bring the SS specs to these levels. Tubes, on the other hand, are generally more linear amplification devices that do not need such levels of Global Feedback. Overuse of feedback in SS amps leads to a flattening of the image and a harsh sound, with more ragged treble. That is why a bulk of mediocre solid state, though measuring well in THD, had high amounts of IMD and is fatiguing over long listening sessions. You dont see this argument too much any more but was wondering when it would pop up.... Still, solid state has come a LONG way and examples do sound very good. kh This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 07-08-2002 at 09:20 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boa12 Posted July 8, 2002 Share Posted July 8, 2002 kh, any recommendations for a 5.1-7.1 tube pre/pro? does the dsp also have to use tubes? if so how big would it be? j/k may have to get a tube preamp in the stereo room & run it into my kenwood kr9600 power ins for that warm, grainy sound. j/k just that we sort of have an apples-oranges thang here. new vs used. digital vs analog. yikes, now i'm afraid to ever show up in the 2-channel section again. (& especially w/ the smurf emotiocons). just kidding here. mh/kh is responsible for my groovy systems link/page. ------------------ My Home Systems Page Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Mobile you said it best! "Amps by the likes of Bryston, Classe, Naim, Chord, Exposure, Boulder, Linn, Mark Levinson, Krell etc make even the best 70s solid state sound positively pedestrian." Yes they do and why OH why did youforget Celeste(MOON series?)as the MOON series sounds at least as good as the best Bryston(14B ST)has to offer. The old solid state for most part is junk,those who say they dont make them like they used never heard a great solid state amp. Only the older recievers were better built and sounded better then the new El Crappo $200 trash can units found in all mass market stores.True,but take a high end reciever from 20 years ago and compare it to a high-end unit from today.The modern high end reciever soundsbetter.Same for amps,preamps,CD,LP and anything audio. Audio is technology and technology improves.So does sound and recordings.Plain and simple TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 ooops - I almost forgot. fini In my book (10X - X)/9 = X Always Now replace X with "almost X" you get (10"almost X" - "almost X")/9 = "almost X" which exactly what your poof ..errr "proof" says. ...I didn't figure the elevator thing would hold up for very long. If you measure the sound difference between a $10 cord and a $1000 cord using an electronic device having a $50 cord.....now that's mind boggling. Well, Im gonna go hang some crystals (rose quartz) over my receiver, I could use a little pink noise. TTFN - coffee's ready Less Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Clu(e)less, you should work on the measuring tool area within your skull, hooked up to your ears.... Dont be afraid. kh This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 07-09-2002 at 06:59 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Hey, I resent that, there is absolutely nothing between my ears! ooops I meant: Hey, I resent that, there is absolutely nothing wrong with what's between my ears! This message has been edited by cluless on 07-09-2002 at 07:47 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Heh.... you are on a roll. The head shaving post was the start; nice to see a fine sense of the absurd. kh This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 07-09-2002 at 08:09 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 quote: Originally posted by cluless: Now replace X with "almost X" you get (10"almost X" - "almost X")/9 = "almost X" which exactly what your poof ..errr "proof" says. Right. Except in my example, 10 "almost X" - "almost X"/9 = X (not "almost X") fini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 tee hee...you found your own "rounding" error. .9999..... is always just an approximation. I guess your infinity is bigger than mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 quote: Originally posted by cluless: I guess your infinity is bigger than mine. Naw. I drive a Toyota. fini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 There are three kinds of people in the world -- those who can do math, and those who can'tf> ------------------ Deanf>s> Klipsch RF7s - AE-25 DJH - AE-3 DJH - Sony 9000ES f>s> This message has been edited by deang on 07-09-2002 at 11:13 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Dean-Simply hillarious! fini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Big finger double post-oops! This message has been edited by fini on 07-09-2002 at 10:09 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 isn't that the "la grange" multiplier???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boa12 Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 quote: Originally posted by sunnysal: isn't that the "la grange" multiplier???? in school, i hated calc but loved zz top. go figure. ------------------ My Home Systems Page Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I have to wonder if THE EARS has ever even HEARD an H/K 430 or 900+ in excellent condition?...or is his blanket remark about all older solid state just unbased OPINION???? As a matter of fact, it seems FEW if ANY of the forum members have heard EITHER of thise FINE EXAMPLES of soild state equipment from over a quarter century ago...but I certainly read alot about how much better today's stuff is compared to them...makes me kinda wonder!! And, for the tubies here...why are so many of you looking for NOS tubes from days gone by if the technology of today for tubes is so much better? The same can be said for SOME of the older S/S...wouldn't you think? I sincerely believe that the build quality of SOME of the older equipment is MUCH better than the vast majority of what is being sold new today. I also believe that there are SOME of the older pieces of equipment that will equal or surpass MANY of the more expensive components of today...because I have HEARD them both! H/K was one of many comapnies that ALMOST went under in the 1980's...but somehow managed to survive...BUT they were ABLE to survive by having their products made in Japan...like so many others did. Even in the mid-1970's, H/K was offering up equipment that was made in Japan...such as their 330 series receiver...but it was NOWHERE as well-made as the 430 was. As a matter of fact, there were MORE products H/K marketed in the mid-70's that WEREN'T of high quality, than WERE of high quality!! Why?...I dunno...but it seems that was the time which they chose to go forward into mass-marketing in order to compete with the Japanese products of the day. Their purchase of RABCO for the piece of junk linear-tracking turntable was a MAJOR mistake in those days...and it hurt them badly!! Fisher equipment also went to hell in a handbasket by the mid 1970's. I can remember when I was working at Klipsch...76-83...it seemed everyday we heard of yet another company closing its doors...the audio industry giants(as for quality) of the previous 20 or so years barely survived those days. And most of them succumbed to making less expensive equipment that put out gobs of filthy watts instead of sticking with the quality they had become famous for...in order to compete with less-expensive equiopment coming out of Asia...some survived, some didn't! ------------------ I can now receive private messages This message has been edited by HDBRbuilder on 07-09-2002 at 08:38 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Well, Andy... you are right. I have never heard that model of HK, either; it was a 4 channel, right? So you do have a valid point here. On the other hand, I have heard many other SS amps from the generation. You may have a good point; it's just that a lot of SS from the 70s sounded pretty average to below average (but were built like tanks compared to typical SS today you see in bargain stores). Some here love 70s Solid state and enjoy collecting it. I have some amps from that time in my own house, namely the Natural Sound Yamaha CR series. But when it comes to transparency and open sound, I believe this gear is generally speaking not up to the current "better" component standards. Hell yes, it is WAY better than the average solid state from the mid-fi names these days, some costing quite an amount. Power supplies were better...transformers....etc. But compared to amps like even Creek, Musical Fidelity, Arcam, etc, they are generally not as transparent, in my experience. And when you bring in names like Bryston, Classe, Naim, Linn, Proceed, Krell, Mark Levinson, Moon (ok Ears), the SS moves to another level. I just dont remember much of any of the solid state sounding very three dimensional with imaging to speak of. I do remember loving my music back then, and that counts for something, indeed. The big monster quad receivers like the 900+ were beasts when run in 2 Channel. I believe they got up to 100watts or so in two channel, which was a lot for a receiver back then. Still, your point is valid in that I dont think too many here have heard the amp(s) your are referring to...which is unfair to you. Still, have you compared your beast to any modern top flight Solid state? kh This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 07-09-2002 at 08:42 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Kelly, My 900+ is going to the shop for its regular "each decade" tune-up...LOL! I have an H/K 800+ on the way...AND an H/K 430!! BOTH are purportedly in EXCELLENT working condition...but "we will see"...if I notice anything out of the "norm"...they will immediately be going into the shop for tune-ups, too!! I can't wait to take the little 430 over to a fellow hornies's home to do a comparo with his recent aquisition of some high-end equipment!! Outta be interesting, to say the least!! He has Belles as mains up front, heresy for center and Cornwalls for rear on his HT set-up right now...also has a pair of LaScalas in the other room...gonna let him hear what made the 430 the finest receiver in its class in the mid-70's...just twenty "twin-powered" wpc...but one helluva little piece of equipment!! Yes, the 900+ put out 32 wpc in quad...has bi-amp switch on back for stereo mode with 90 wpc...but is best NOT to use it that way....very hard on the rear amp sections when you do that!! 800+ is basically the same receiver with less power...and a few less doo-dads...but still has all the important goodies in it that MOST of the top of the line quad receivers of its day had as add-ons...such as CD-4 demodulator, etc... The 800+ is one of those I never got to hear in those days...so it will be interesting to me to put it through its paces!!...And to see how it compares to the old 900+!! When I finally get around to building my new LaScala cabinets...I will decide which one gets the place of honor for them...until I get around to building a tube set-up...I have been thinking about Killer's "home-made to his own design" tube set-up...gonna have to holler at him and discuss it, I guess! Maybe he will e-mail me pics and schematic and helpful hints in building a copy of it! One advantage I have is that I am still on good terms with my former foreman at the foundry pattern shop...so I can still access the mills and such for any machining I want to do...a good thing! I have to wonder how nice it will be to have something I have built "from scratch" myself to listen to...will definitely be an experience...I also have myself on great terms with a local "mom & pop" jewelry store that does LOTS of gold replating and such...they have a fairly large plating set-up...so I can see something very "special" in my future with glowing tubes reflecting off the gold plating as I crank up the LaScalas!! ------------------ I can now receive private messages This message has been edited by HDBRbuilder on 07-09-2002 at 09:35 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluless Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 no NO NO NO.....Its La Grunge Multiplier....courtesy of Kurt Cobain and Soul Asylum....Jeeez..and what happens if I throw a bit of Rancid ...gawd ...I knew this was wrong...If someone could just .... save me..the flompy doodles...are looking like floundering frogs...had a cat named Magnolia once... and people listen to these speakers in small rooms? Lol... Sorry, turning up the volume...just because...I can.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.