Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Hi, Craig: "I just have very rarely ran into something that I couldn't play around with and make better. In fact I can't recall you ever stated something was crappy that you have worked on or auditioned." Sure, I understand what you're saying. My point is that our (at least 'my')improving on a design may absolutely involve but not be limited to installing better parts. 'Improving' vintage amplifiers would certainly involve the replacement of such things as leaky filter caps or old caps and resistors that have drifted over the years from the original values. My point is that you seem to be getting fairly good results without having to buy Hovland capacitors as the replacement for every cap in an amp. Or am I wrong about that? However, I think you would agree that the changes you have made, as you say, have almost always resulted in an improvement, correct? Let me just say, Craig, that I think that the reason you have gotten very good results has at least something to do with the fact that you are really doing more to update an already very good and time-tested design. Many Scott, Fisher, Pilot, Grommes, McIntosh, and Dynaco amps were the absolute state-of-the-art in their day. Many of those amps also have extremely well-made output transformers, and were designed by smart-as-heck engineers. This is something you stated above, yourself. In other words, replacing worn out parts, which in having either completely failed or drifted significantly from their original values of capacitance or resistance WOULD and COULD result in a subsequent lower level of performance, is NOT the same, in my opinion, as trying to use better parts in a preamplifier or amplifier that has much more important 'issues.' For example, someone might design an amp without giving any regarding to inter-stage impedance relationships -- which is important, and if not addressed in the design stage, can result in absolutely horrible sound. How do I know that? because I've done it myeself! Or, for that matter, the value of coupling capacitor (not the type of cap, I'm talking about the VALUE)used to couple one stage to the next may be inappropriate or a less than adequate choice in relation to the input impedance of the next gain stage. That can also result in poor sound quality. Another case may simply have to do with the wire dress of the component. There may be cases where point-to-point wiring resulted in overly long lengths of hookup wire going all over the place, picking up stray capacitance, RF and EM interference, etc. And even that isn't a design problem as much as it is degradation in execution and craftsmanship. The design actually may have been very good, where good quality parts were already in place, but the construction of the component was poor. Most designers with whom I have talked, as well as MANY DIYers who build from scratch, almost without exception are initially concerned NOT with the kind or type of capacitor to use, but the ACTUAL design and essential values of L, R, and C, as well as Miller capactiance effects, and the impedance relationaships between stages. All those things are among the absolutely essential elements of a 'good' design, not whether the capacitors are going to be Hovland, Jupiter, Cardas, Auricap, Jensen, Kimber -- or made up of mylar, Teflon, or Saran Wrap. In short, a good circuit design should NOT have to depend on the most expensive parts available to sound good. I have seen far too many cases where very excellent performance, indeed absolutely first-rate/top-shelf performance had been obtained by extremely clever and talented DESIGN! That is the key -- the idea and the concept, not the particular brand of part. I have known people who like to talk more about types and names of capacitors, but are unable to discuss in depth the workings of the circuit for which they are being used; however it is the circuit and NOT the part that in my opinion is not only a little more important, but VASTLY more important than whether the coupling cap between input, driver, and output stages has Hovland or Jensen stamped on it. I have experience with both of those brands, and like them both. The Jensens don't sound rolled off, but did in fact seem to just a bit when for fun I installed equivalent values of Kimber cap -- and the Kimbers don't sound much different from the 25 cent mylars I tried. The design is the key, but various kinds or brands of passive parts can certainly be used to change the sound. Whether the resulting sound is better or worse is a personal thing -- in my opinion. Erik edit: You also mentioned, "In fact I can't recall you ever stated something was crappy that you have worked on or auditioned." I'm glad that is the case. I would rather not use phrases such as "This plain sucks" "This is a crappy preamplifier" "This particular brand of 2A3 is lame," etc. Part of the reason that for this might stem from the fact that I encourage students (remember I'm an art teacher) to use meaningful descriptions when talking about and looking at drawing, painting, and sculpture. To say that something was 'crappy' or that it just plain 'sucked' might very well be an honest response, but words like that don't say anything in terms of WHY something was not to his/her liking. The opposite is true, too! We could say something like, "Wow! I just love that painting by Paul Klee!" So. That's all very good, but what about it do you like? Is the color, the subject, the application of paint, the constrasting elements and principles? Let's try to go beyond the abstact concept of the word 'love,' (or 'crappy' for that matter)and try to get at what it is specifically that you like or dislike. More than that, Craig, I find such words basically disrespectful to the person involved. My interpretation of amps, preamps, CD players, or paintings and sculpture are simply my interpretations -- and that's all. My observations are only right as far as I'm concerned, and I would rather not make statement that sort of fling things, whether art or audio equipment, into the landfill. I have said that I prefer the sound of one component over another, as I did when Mark's Peach was here and I compared it with my own preamp. I said the same for the Grounded Grid from Transcendent Sound. In fact, I wish Mark's Peach were here right now! I described my response to an SS Carver preamplifier I also used for awhile, and indicated that I only enjoyed the sound when I was using its Sonic Holography feature. Other than that, I preferred my own tube preamp. So, I think there are other ways of expressing opinions that both share how we respond to a paricular thing (food, art, music, music making machines -- whatever!)yet, do not ridicule or otherwise negatively portray the source of any of those things. It's only an opinion. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Actually, Craig, I have to plead guilty. Go back to my response to the AL network I used to like, and you'll see what I mean. Compared to the new 12db octave band-pass network I recently made, it sounds really dull and uninvolving. The type 'A' network with the autoformer replaced by an L-pad was also much better. Maybe it would suddenly be transformed by replacing all the of old capacitors with similar replacements from Hovland, Auri-cap, and a 30uf Jensen oil -- as well as inductors from Alpha-Core and Solen. Then again, maybe it wouldn't! To try to find out would result in a pretty expensive failure if it didn't help very much. Maybe this could serve as a good example of where a possibly poor design may not gain much of an improvement by installing new and very expensive capacitors and inductors... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Mark: Thanks for contributing with you experience and knowledge, here. I have one differing opinion -- which in itself is very much only my opinion -- regarding something you mention.: "You could take a PAS 3 and add $500 worth of fancy parts, and it would be a bit better, but it would still be a PAS 3. Which is to say, the fancy parts would make an improvement." I don't think the concept of whether a part change resulted in an 'improvement' is a constant or universal factor. If so, that would mean that the change was agreed upon by ALL people. It is a varying factor in the equation, and can only be applied relative to the preferences or tastes of the listener. I have changed parts thousands of times in order to achieve a certain 'sound' that I personally like. This is as true, I think, for individual parts as it is for organizations of parts that combined together constitute a component. And it's true for tubes. I really very much like the open and detailed quality of KR 2A3 tubes (which I will be using in the amp I am currently building), but not everyone feels that way. In fact, I know as many people who don't care of them as do. Neither is right concerning the matter, and neither is wrong. What is consitutes a very high quality or 'better' part for one person, might not be the case for someone else. That's all I am saying. ...actually, that's not all I'm saying. The more important issue in my estimation, and something with which you have far more experience than I, has to do with the circuit design, itself. I know designers who would never simply select individual brands or kinds of passive and active parts BEFORE the design, itself. That would be something like," Ok, I love Hovland capacitors so much that I'm going to make a preamp so I can use them." A more professional approach, in my opinion, would be to deal with the many aspects of circuit design first, including the math for obtaining the correct values of capacitance, resistance, impedance issues, etc., and then fine tune that design -- ONCE it is genearlly perceived as successful or very promising, from there. To do otherwise would be sort of like dumping all sorts of seasonings and herbs and spices into a soup or stew before it's essential flavor is a known thing. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Eric, Let's get something straight before we venture on. I do not think freshening up a vintage amp with new caps is improving it's design. I do much more to many models then just change out the caps. Also I don't just limit my work load to "Vintage Amps" I have worked on many modern tube amplifiers and have never had a customer say that I didn't improve them by a huge margin. I attribute many of the improvements I achieve to tweaking the circuits to make them more precise and value changes to coupling caps, bypass caps, resistors, and filter networks. Then once that is all done I usually tweak the feedback for smoother response if needed. How do I know I have improved the amplifier ? Simple by testing it with REAL test equipment and listening before and after. Like has been stated here its all subjective but backing your subjective opinion with solid test results IMHO lessons the subjective part of the equation. Craig PS I don't remember saying anything to the effect that the Buzz/hum in the Octal 6 preamp could not be fix. I said I did not have the time or need to get to it so why not let you play with it since you mentioned here that you thought it was a neat design a number of times. Although from experience of completely reworking Lloyd Ultra 4A to what is now is "Special Addition" to allow its use with efficient horn speakers without unwanted noise and limited frequency response. I did have the opinion that it would most likely take some design changes to get the thing real quiet and sounding its best. I just didn't have time or any real need for the piece of gear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yes, lets get that straight, Craig. I never claimed that that was the only work you did. I was only referencing the aspect of your work that you brought up yourself. Maybe I missed something you said about designing current components (?). Here is one quote from what I said above: " Many of those amps also have extremely well-made output transformers, and were designed by smart-as-heck engineers. This is something you stated above, yourself." In other words, I'm pointing out the fact that you also recognize the fact that the vintage amps you have worked on sound better when replacing older parts. You will find I am pretty firm and rigid in terms of individual hearing abilities and listening preferences and tastes. And, I believe you when you say that changes you have made are both preferred by you, yourself, as well as for whom the changes were made. Please note this: HOWEVER, that does not mean that all people will agree that the change is for the better. That's not to say that it's 'bad' per se', just simply that they may not agree with your choice of capacitor seasoning. Straight enough? Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Here is one quote from what I said above: " Many of those amps also have extremely well-made output transformers, and were designed by smart-as-heck engineers. This is something you stated above, yourself." I did ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Craig! gosh.... That quote is from me. I am acknowledging the fact that you also pointed out that you have been and are working on already good designs. I know that's how you feel, and was only saying that whatever improvement or change in sound is and MUST be subjectively based. I have an amp to build... Happy New Year, Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 ---------------- On 12/31/2004 12:30:26 PM Erik Mandaville wrote: Craig! gosh.... That quote is from me. I am acknowledging the fact that you also pointed out that you have been and are working on already good designs. I know that's how you feel, and was only saying that whatever improvement or change in sound is and MUST be subjectively based. I have an amp to build... Happy New Year, Erik ---------------- Eric, Your actually looking at my statements from a skewed point of view. My true meaning is there are very few poor, crappy or whatever you would like to call them designs vintage or modern. When talking modern gear almost every piece made today the circuits can be traced right back to vintage designs with mild twists. Most of the pieces that I find less then stellar the limitations can be traced to poor quality transformers or transformers rated to just barely do the job. This is almost always true in modern gear and very common in respect to power transformers in vintage integrated amps. My entire point here is finding a poorly, crappy or what ever piece of gear is a hard chore so there for they almost always benefit from better components placed in the proper place where it counts. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 ---------------- On 12/31/2004 12:38:49 PM mdeneen wrote: Hey Craig - - What'd you do - take December off? Haven't seen you around in ages! HNY, dude. mdeneen ---------------- Just been busy from all angles. You have been scarce yourself ! Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 "My entire point here is finding a poorly, crappy or what ever piece of gear is a hard chore so there for they almost always benefit from better components placed in the proper place where it counts." There's a fine line isn't there? Say if a particular tube power/integrated amp has a PS xformer that bakes and rattles, and small OPT's that are pretty much limited to midband and loosely coupled with no endbells. Now if they took these shortcuts with regards to iron, you can bet there is no choke in the supply. And you can really bet that passive part quality is going to be low as well. And would guess circuit design would be nothing special. Is guess one can improve on that, but in all practicality...... There is vintage junk like that in my experience, even the tubes usually aren't worth salvaging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Mike, Well come on were not talking low grade console amplifiers here. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted December 31, 2004 Author Share Posted December 31, 2004 Mike: If I misunderstood you, than please pardon me -- it was not my intention to twist anything you said into something it wasn't. I was trying to understand your message, and may have gotten that wrong. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 "If I misunderstood you, than please pardon me -- it was not my intention to twist anything you said into something it wasn't. I was trying to understand your message, and may have gotten that wrong." I'm confused. What message were you twisting? The DC blocking cap on a single-ended OTL? I think we all agree that a fancy boutique cap doesn't matter in that situation. Have you and Shawn tried different types of caps in that spot and heard any sort of objectionable differences, or better percieved sonics, or any difference at all? (Ya, Ya, it's all been posted...) Doesn't the Transcendent SE OTL just use a common electrolytic in the DC blocking spot? Like a Nichicon VX series or something? "Mike, Well come on were not talking low grade console amplifiers here." There's the fine line! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 ---------------- On 12/31/2004 4:48:03 PM mike stehr wrote: There's the fine line! ---------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted January 1, 2005 Author Share Posted January 1, 2005 Argh! Sorry you guys! I was going to mention something about console amps to Mike, but mainly wanted to ask Craig to pardon me if I had misunderstood whatever it was he said. Mike: I apologize for the confusion -- what I said didn't have anything to do with what you said -- what I said had something to do with what Craig said, which itself was in regard to something I said about something else he said....or something like that. My wife always says she thinks I really have ADHD, which may in fact be the case. I go around the house on the weekends doing 15 things at one time, and once in awhile forget where I left off with one or two of them. So, hopefully this is at least partially repaired! Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 Erik, You worry to much. This is no big deal at all. By the way your first paragraph confused the hell out of me Happy New Year Craig 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.