$1000.00 Amp. for Klipschorns

[Wrench722]

One more

[DrWho]

It looks pretty, it must sound good.

[NOSValves]

I might be missing something here, but which comes first the chicken or the egg? How are you going to tune the room without the equipment and if you use equipment other than what will end up there, will the room be tuned appropiately for the equipment that is not there yet?

Back on amp topic, you could easily obtain a pair of McIntosh MC250 (run them in mono) for under a grand, Solid State, with autoformers, but sound really nice with Khorns

By George you got it!!

[pauln]

The room IS a problem and will need treatment.

I think Dr. Who picked up on something but didn't mention it... the described room is 18x18 - a square - and the stated long term plan is to have four speakers - one in each corner.

[ben.]

I think there's validity to both points here.

Given some reasonably consistent factors including speaker choice and placement, listening area and room layout, the process of correcting room deficiencies shouldn't be affected by upstream components. In an ideal circumstance, that process is meant to ameliorate the imperfections in the manner in which your room abuses sound waves.

However, we're all pretty much half-assing it when compared to perfect circumstances. $500 or even $1K for acoustic treatments is surely in that region. (Before anyone gets bent because I'm accusing them of hafassin anything, please note that I don't exclude myself from the comparison.) So where does that bring us? Hopefully, a somewhat educated or at least informed attampt to make do with what can be managed practically, whether our limits are financial, aesthetic, physical or God forbid intellectual.

I think typically this leads to a "cut and try" approach with listening tests as the primary or exclusive evaluative tool. The usefulness of this is limited by the intuition or skill of the ear of the particular beholder. Without specific knowledge or copius luck, a "something funky" reaction even when pinpointed to an accurate frequency range can easily present a serious challenge when it comes to cleaning up the problem. A harshness in the upper mids may be tube-rolled or component-selected to obscurity, but the problem might just require a little bit of acoustic material in the right place. In turn, the system that was optimized to sound most pleasing to the beholder may sound dull or uninvolving once the simple physical problem in the room is corrected.

Is it possible to get carried away with all of this? Well sure. But the guy's not on a music forum talking about Tegan and Sara, he's here asking about how to make his music sound better by spending $1K.

I got my Mc30 for under $1K shipped with OK tubes on A'gon. I have two bigarse boxes of Auralex that have been sitting for over a year waiting for me to get situated in any particular room. I've been enjoying lots and lots of music long before I had the McIntosh or the Auralex.

It's just balance, guys. Anyone got any blue mailbox paint?

[DrWho]

Agreed, Ben [Y]

[jackpod]

A point that no one has mentioned, and maybe just automatically assumed is how is it going to be determined where the room deficiencies are and what acoustical treatments are going to be applied. Not everyone has high priced spectrum analyzers. If the tests are going to be done with a test cd and an SPL meter, upstream equipment CAN make a difference. If the current electronics have a bright top end and you treat the room accordingly, any future electronics that have a more mellow top end will be further "mellowed" because the room treatments are absorbing more than if the treatments were applied using the latter electronics, same applies in reverse and well as low end and midrange. Now if you are fortunate to have a nice pricey spectrum analyzer with known response curves, sure then the room can be treated and almost anything will sound good in there. Unfortunately this is not a perfect world, so "perfect world" anologies don't always apply.

[jackpod]

And also I would like to clarify "spectrum analyzer" I am not making reference to a mic plugged into a laptop soundcard. Average computer sound cards are far from being calibrated or flat. I own both an Audiocontrol Model C101 and a McIntosh AA2, with calibrated mics. I have seen the differences

[Parrot]

The room IS a problem and will need treatment.

I think Dr. Who picked up on something but didn't mention it... the described room is 18x18 - a square - and the stated long term plan is to have four speakers - one in each corner.

LOL! I hope you're not a doctor and I hope if you have one he doesn't diagnose using your method. Without ever having seen you, the doctor tells you over the phone, "You ARE sick and I have called in your prescriptions to the pharmacy." He hangs up before you get a chance to tell him that you called to ask him to speak at a conference.

[NOSValves]

Don't mean to change track. I am thinking of buying this.

AudiogoN ForSale: Jolida JD 1000a

Any input?

Go EZ guys Don't need any one getting hurt.

Wrench,

simply ignore all this other traffic in the thread, threads often get side tracked on open forums. I for one will comment on anything that you see that strikes your fancy. Many options available slightly used and sooner or later you will find one that you like for its looks, size, function and Sonics.

Craig

[NOSValves]

I think there's validity to both points here.

Given some reasonably consistent factors including speaker choice and placement, listening area and room layout, the process of correcting room deficiencies shouldn't be affected by upstream components. In an ideal circumstance, that process is meant to ameliorate the imperfections in the manner in which your room abuses sound waves.

However, we're all pretty much half-assing it when compared to perfect circumstances. $500 or even $1K for acoustic treatments is surely in that region. (Before anyone gets bent because I'm accusing them of hafassin anything, please note that I don't exclude myself from the comparison.) So where does that bring us? Hopefully, a somewhat educated or at least informed attampt to make do with what can be managed practically, whether our limits are financial, aesthetic, physical or God forbid intellectual.

I think typically this leads to a "cut and try" approach with listening tests as the primary or exclusive evaluative tool. The usefulness of this is limited by the intuition or skill of the ear of the particular beholder. Without specific knowledge or copius luck, a "something funky" reaction even when pinpointed to an accurate frequency range can easily present a serious challenge when it comes to cleaning up the problem. A harshness in the upper mids may be tube-rolled or component-selected to obscurity, but the problem might just require a little bit of acoustic material in the right place. In turn, the system that was optimized to sound most pleasing to the beholder may sound dull or uninvolving once the simple physical problem in the room is corrected.

Is it possible to get carried away with all of this? Well sure. But the guy's not on a music forum talking about Tegan and Sara, he's here asking about how to make his music sound better by spending $1K.

I got my Mc30 for under $1K shipped with OK tubes on A'gon. I have two bigarse boxes of Auralex that have been sitting for over a year waiting for me to get situated in any particular room. I've been enjoying lots and lots of music long before I had the McIntosh or the Auralex.

It's just balance, guys. Anyone got any blue mailbox paint?

Ben,

Excellent post!! I agree 1000% thank you

Craig

[Lascaladan]

This is a square room, not optimum. Will he be sitting 17-18 feet back, possibly another problem. Will he achieve an "image". Dr. Who mentions early reflections. Most rooms have them, so getting rid of them could be important. What about the 2 channel "source". No mention of this. I believe a good source is the 1st step, before amplification. Any acoustic feedback issues? He wants the system to "rock" so I am in the SS camp, at least with the power amp at the price point.

[Wrench722]

Hay NOSValves

What do you suggestions for the money?

[Wrench722]

NOSValves

How about this?

AudiogoN ForSale: Dynaco Mark III

What is a good price?

[Allan Songer]

Uh..... those are dress-up oak boxes for the amps to sit on . . .

But, this would be a nice little rig that you could buy today, have it freshened up and STILL have money in the bank.

I have owned my 500C for 30 years and it still does duty in my garage system!

http://cgi.ebay.com/FISHER-500-C-FM-STEREO-TUBE-RECEIVER-7591-W-CABINET_W0QQitemZ280064661589QQihZ018QQcategoryZ67807QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Wrench722]

Thanks Allen I guess I just did not read it.[*-)]

[anarchist]

Did anyone catch the Poseidon boards on those "Vintageclone" Mark III's. Send them a note wrench as they intend to start selling the restored amps. Tell them you want that pair and see what they are asking.

Those oak stands are pretty damn nice though and do make those Mark III's stand out.

[NOSValves]

Allan's recomendation is a great one from the vintage world. Great all around piece that you can listen to all day. If vintage is the route you want to take.

For used modern in your price range as much as I hate pointing someone in the off shore sourced direction. The Cayin line of amps from a few years back do well for the bucks spent especially with a quick cheap little adjustment I found in them the newer models are over priced for what you get IMHO. Also the Prologue line of amps which are truly a Cayin under a dealers name with a few changes would be a reasonable option used but not at the new price. Don't pay attention to the advertising hype around the prologue line. IMHO through testing on the bench its a bunch of hype about nothing but still they do sound pretty darn good for the money. Keep my recommendations in context were talking entry to mid level modern gear.

Craig

[NOSValves]

NOSValves

How about this?

AudiogoN ForSale: Dynaco Mark III

What is a good price?

Those oak stands are awesome and the Mark III that sit on them could be a great option also. You could opt to go that route and use your existing HT receiver as the preamp for the time being. I suspect it will not have a total positive effect on the Mark III's as a preamp though. But you could dive in this way and purchase a preamp later along with the Niles switch I mentioned and effectively separate the two electronic systems which IMHO in the end is the absolute best way to go. I find mixing the two to always have compromises I personally am not willing to make.

Craig

[joshnich]

Here are a few options you may want to consider

Dyanco ST 70 with the full NosValves updates in superior condition $650.00

Scott 299a or 299d Both have the full Nosvalves treatment. 600.00 for either one

Fisher 500 c in great cosmetic condition. I pulled this from a console brought it up on a variac and it sounds good. However I would have it gone through as Allan suggested in his post. $400.00

Let me know if your interested in any or all. I also have a Dyanco PAS 2 preamp that I would include with the ST 70 for an additional 100 bucks this is stock and has not been updated but sounds OK. In order to get the best out of the ST70 I would look to use a different preamp. As suggested earlier a juicy music merlin would fit the bill.

I am only selling as I need the space and am trying to downsize!

Thanks

Josh