| Post removed |
As the calming of the seas are upon us, lets take a deep breath and wait for Uncle Joseph to respond to all our speculative discussion. Sherod, I do not believe your preamp is broken in yet. I would try and use voice recordings to see how the midrange changes over time. Like fine wine it has to "mold" before you can enjoy it. Trust Joseph and his upgrade just a little more. |
The wife and kids are gone tonight all day Friday. I have the day off also!! I am listening to music late into the night and loving it. No doubt the 2.1 is coming into its own in my play room. It has been on with loud music all day and night thus far. Best sound I have had in my room. My Belles Reference 350 specs are as follows. This is for Tvad to help me understand how these numbers mate with the AH preamp. "Input sensitivity 1.98 for rated power" "Input impedance 50,000 ohms" Tvad, I think speaker wire also impacts impedance? Sherod, I am staying tuned as I feel kinda bad as I think you decided on the upgrade based on my comments. I sure hope in works out to your complete liking. Bill |
Well Gentlemen. I have decided to go on my own with a slight modification. My instinct to hunt( as Stltrains says about man) and my desire to know the truth forced me to do a little experiment. Tonight, I very carefully took out the new output caps and bypasses. I replaced them with the original upgraded Hovland 4.7uf caps from before the upgrade. The system has been playing now for about an hour. So how does it sound, you ask? The "breath of life" is back. The midrange now has that palpable realness that I've been missing. The soundstage now has normal front to back depth. Highs are once again clean and extended and the bass is as powerful as it was. The power supply mods that Joseph did seems to make an improvement. I get a slight increase in volume, but the dynamic differences are still realistic in portraying music. I'm sure that the new wire harnesses are also contributing to a cleaner sound as well. I'm not sure why this small change makes so much of a difference in my system but I'll guess and say that it was a combination of an impedance matching issue with my amps along with some phase irregularities that I mentioned in my previous post caused by the bypass caps. All I know is that I'm a happier guy tonight and my ears are pleased with the musical portrayal. |
Slttrains - congrats on a good decision in a complex obsession prone enviroment:) I am very happy for your excellent synergy among your pieces of equipment. It is so healing to be able to sit back and let the music transport you to wonderland. Bill, I also have the house to myself tonight and tommorrow. Wife is taking second daughter on a tour of possible colleges. Listening to Bach tonight and marveling the night away. |
Sherod, Wow your a man of action! Seems you got down to the bottom line on the upgrade and burn -in. Not so much the wire harness or power supply, rather its the output caps and bypasses that are troubling you. That is great to know Sherod, but one important question still remains for this audionut. Would the caps you've removed ever have settled in and actually sounded better than the ones you put back in? Vic and Joe sure think they did? Just reading this thread we know other caps took upwards of 350 hours and changed quite a lot over that time. I am curious what your thoughts are on this. One other question, I hope someone can help me with this. Tube positions 1 and 3 are where? Looking at the front of the unit and starting from the right hand side? Stayed up to 3:00 AM listening. Music always sounds better after midnight and what's with that folks! Thanks, Bill |
Bill, I think 140 hours on my upgrade was enough break-in for me to know if the caps were right for my system. Regarding the tube locations. Looking down from the front, starting from left to right is location 1-4. 1 and 3 are the most critical to the sound. I might be up to the wee hours myself listening this weekend. The fun is back. Enjoy. |
| Post removed |
Grant, I agree that Blackgate caps take an unusually lengthy time to break in. Some have said the larger values take up to 600 hours or more. Most of your polyprops, metal films, oil impregnated, etc. take much less time. Speaking of Blackgates, I have read that the manufacturer has stopped making them. I know that Joseph uses them in some of his tuner mods. He put some in my tuner mod. |
Sherod I'm very glad you have the sound back that is to your liking. Its a fine line especially when you have already achieved and had that special sound, then its gone way to go you explorer you. Last night was lp cleaning night for me and now that i have switched to walkers prelude system, the time factor is doubled. From what i can hear its worth the extra time though. Bad part a lost night of music. I'm going to poll you guys as i have a decision to make. I asked for a 2.1 nrp to audition and was sent a 2.1 nbrp. I have not used the balanced connections. Victor is sending me a xlr ic for me to try balanced out. I know Grannying prefers balanced. How do the rest of you feel about balanced connections. I dont have any source gear that is balanced. My amps do take both rca and balanced ic. Its a 800 dollar upgrade. And for me as with most every dollar is valuable. |
| Post removed |
I indicated that I would provide you after the RMAF with a full break out of all the upgrades we now make to the 2.0 to bring it to the level of the 2.1. Subsequent to my first post about the upgrade we made further improvements to the 2.1. These were in response to a slight high frequency edge we noticed in crescendoes, whether those of a female vocalist or of a symphony orchestra. After listening carefully, we concluded that this edge was really high output breakup. To solve this problem, we went back to the drawing board to figure out how to beef up the power supply so we could increase the output voltage and thus better handle sudden peak surges. As a result, we increased the number of power capacitors and changed the number of rectifier diodes to permit us to increase the output voltage from 100 volts to 140 volts. To our ears this change alone resulted in softer highs, especially on loud crescendoes, and much more pronounced dramatic contrasts, as if the dynamic headroom had sudenly increased dramatically. In works like Scherazade, where sudden dynamic contrasts abound, we found the sense of raw power unleashed by the crescendo had vastly more energy than before, so that what formerly seemed fine and responsive, now in retrospect seemed compressed. We found this voltage change abounded in other pluses and resulted in no minuses. Some of you, Sherod, for example, noticed an increase in gain, while Grannyring did not. Whether you do or don't experience increased gain will be a function of the tubes you are using and whether they translate the increased voltage into gain--Sherod's do and Grannyring's don't. The other changes have already been described. The most important being that we upgraded the old multipath wiring harness from the RCA jacks to the volume pot and to the main preamplifier PC board and replaced it with a new upgraded Transparency wiring harness, which like the Transparency now comes wrapped in an extra isolating layer of Teflon for better noise suppression. The layout was also changed. Because of the better noise suppression of the harness, we were able to dispense with the line filter. For your interest the line filter was never a part of the “n” upgrade: it was always part of the original design and exists in the TP 2.0 as well. It will be returned to you for use elsewhere in your system if you wish. Because the internal harness is essentially an internal Transparency harness, like that cable, it needs almost 100 hours to burn in. The improvements that come from upgrading cabling are those that we experienced with this upgrade--better microdetail retrieval, improved harmonic texture, etc. The next big change was to replace the Hovland caps, which also will be returned to you, with the larger, more expensive shielded capacitors we now use in the TP 2.1n version. In addition, we take a small 0.22 uf Solen cap and parallel it with the large cap. In our experience, this softened the highs and removed a slight high end burr without rolling off the top. The improved caps to our ears dramatically improved the soundstage, both side to side and front to rear and improved the imaging. We also found them to provide a less veiled sonic signature. The Hovlands are very smooth, but in comparison they are quite compressed and appear to mask the harmonic texture of the instruments. While there was a slight loss of smoothness with the new caps, we found the gains substantially outweighed the losses, and we abandoned the Hovlands without regret. Some listeners, Sherod, for example, and another of our 2.1 customers, are hearing things as a result of the capacitor change, that frankly we are not, which is disconcerting, since we are finding it difficult to be of help because we can not reproduce what they are hearing. Joseph has actually gone so far as to replace the caps again with Hovlands in order to conduct an A-B to see if he can reproduce what the others describe, but without success. He wonder whether the increased soundstage of the new caps requires a slightly different speaker placement because of the wider and deeper soundstage. Frankly, this is just a guess, since we really can not reproduce what is being heard, and other owners and revieweres of the 2.1 do not report it. The other changes in parts, e.g., by virtue of adding capacitors, contributed less to the sonic improvement. If any of you are having problems with ground loop issues or tube microphonics, Joseph will look into them at this time. Finally Joseph will inspect the preamplifier to be certain it is operating properly. Some owners have tended to over-value the significance of the cap change. They are not the whole story, though in terms of cost, they are the biggest cost item--$85 with the Solens at our cost. Some have asked if they can install them. Sometimes, one sees very wide traces on the PCB. For example, we saw them at the RMAF. But wide traces increase inductance and thus impair the sound so Joseph's traces are very fine. Sonically this is a benefit but it means they are easily damaged, so we do not encourage replacing parts. Doing so without our authorization will void the warranty. Finally, Joseph is finding that the entire upgrade takes him about 5 hours, longer than he had expected, so we are compelled to increase thee price of the 2.0 to 2.1 upgradeto $375, and the cost of the 3.0 to 3.1 from $400 to $475. On an entirely different note, Joseph feels he has gone as far as he can with the 2 series preamp design. He wants to put his energies to designing an amp and to designing a dual mono design preamp with upgraded hardward and parts, just to see what he can do when he is not preoccupied with meeting a price point. The amp is a source of concern since there are so many ways to go. Soon I will place a post asking for some direction from you. I will also in the next couple of weeks post a report on the show. Thanks for all your ongoing support. Victor |
I don't prefer XLR over RCA in general. It always depends on how the unit at hand is made. Many times I can't tell the difference on many pieces of gear. In this case Joseph made the XLR (b) version better sounding to my ears. He designd it this way and that is why the B version costs more. Stlrains, be sure to give the wire at least 70 hours of burn in before coming to a conclusion. I think you will like his XLR wire with your preamp. Funny that Victor said one may have to move the speakers with the upgraded unit. I did and found a nice sweet spot different from the previous speaker location. I moved the speakers 7 inches further apart and for the first time toed them in about 5 degrees. They were previousely pointed straight ahead. I have found Victor's comments to be spot - on. The upgraded unit offers a whole new realm of music. I hear so much more in the music. Much more life and energy. Turn it up and complex passages with dramatic volume swings just soar out of my Dali speakers. I look forward to the amp they build and will be one of the first ones in line. My next audio expenditure will be to upgrade my DAC however. Bill |
gentlemen thought i might put my 2 cents worth on this thread regarding the upgrade. i have the upgraded 2.1nB which has about 130 hours so far in my opinion the unit blossomed after 120 hours. in comparing the old 2.0nB vs. 2.1nB i much prefer the latter. to my ears the 2.1nB sounds much nicer, more complete. i've compared it to my previous preamp krell krc3 hands down it sounded 3-4 times better. the krell sounded flat, no emotion, just plain. to my recollection when i compared my old 2.0nB to the krell krc3 the ah was only 1-1/2 to 2 times better. bottom line is i've noticed a big improvement with the upgraded unit and with due time i believe it will sound even better. jojo |
Sherod, hope you are stil enjoying your new preamp. I admire risk takers and hope that your decision to make further changes did not void the warranty. As for me, I will wait it out a little longer since the sound I am experiencing is musical and dynamic enough in my Condo, at least for now. I am playing at 11 o'clock and on rare occasions for guests its 12 to 1 o'clock. Lots of headroom to spare. |
Thanks, guys, for the well wishes. I feel like I'm getting get well wishes after my near-death situation. Now that I have the old Hovlands back in, the phasey sound is gone and the sound my ears are familiar with is back, to a certain extent. Having the preamp now on for about 24 hours, the sound seems a bit dark for me, but that could be other issues. I'm going to just listen to music this weekend and try to relax and release some of the stress that has built up for me these last couple of weeks. I'm sorry to have stirred up a hornet's nest for everyone, but I'm a perfectionist and I want my hobby of musical listening to be the best possible. |
I'm confused as to where this upgrade is going, left, right, up, down, break-in or break-out ? Like La45, I'll wait for all the dust to settle, then make a decision. I'll stick with my original mods, the acrylic top, floating the circuit boards and adding a Furutech gold IEC inlet for the time being. The AH is already in batting distance of the infamous REF 3, what more could you ask from a 2.5K preamp ? Now, I have to find some musical, dependable mono amps to get my tunes back up and runnin ........ |
Greetings to all. I rarely post, but I've been following the action closely. I just wanted to say that I'm very appreciative of Sherod and others for their time and efforts on testing thing so we can benefit from their experiences. It's very easy to sit back and just watch. I just wanted to say, "Thanks." I have the 2.0 and 8.0 phono stage, the phono which has the new "mystery caps." I've found those caps to be very good and very quiet so I've been tempted to trade in the Hovlands on the 2.0. The latest thread has me going back and forth. I'm still ready to pull the trigger but the extra 75 bucks made me gulp (am I a cheap skate or what?). One question for Sherod: how about a V-Cap bypass on the new 2.1 cap. That's one combo that hasn't been tried, right? Sang |
jojo - Welcome and thanks for your input. Your description helps put the differences between 2.0 and 2.1 in perspective. sltrains - I could tell the differences between balanced and RCA right away (with no breakin on the XLR cables), even my brother who was listening casually heard it clearly with balanced being better Victor - thanks for the thorough explanation. It is very clear and captures the effort and care you and Joseph are putting into things. I agree that it is a great use of new creative energy to now focus on an amp. I can not imagine exactly how the 2.1 can be significantly better given how wondereful the 2.0 sounds but with the folks here mostly suggesting that it is, as well as Victor and Joseph's excellent ears I know that an audition is in my future to hear for myself. Question for Victor. How close do you think that the current modifications can now take the modded 2.0nB toward the 2.1nB? Has anyone done this A-B comparision between those two units broken in? |
Hi Sang, I tried several value V-caps, both the Teflon and oil-impregnated in different values as bypass and none sounded right. All bypasses on the outputs caused this "shelving" effect where the sound lost its wholeness and took on the characteristics of the cap used as the bypass. Both Joseph and Victor have good systems and I'm sure good ears, but my system preferred the 2.0n version in the end. Your mileage might vary. Please don't think that I'm a troll or naysayer. I was one of the early buyers of the TP 2.0n preamp and if you'll peruse the threads, you'll see that I was always there to champion the work and genius of the "Master" Mr. Chow. I feel my praise of his preamp has played a small, but significant role in helping others to decide to try and now enjoy his preamp. |
Stltrains,in response to your querie re XLR and RCA connections I'm in the 50 50 camp.I have single ended from my source to the AH and XLR from the AH to the Cary.The balanced mode between pre and amp simply sounds better in my system.Like some others I'm also on the fence regarding the upgrade.Have a good weekend everyone. |
Sherod, I've been an avid reader of this thread. I just don't post. I know you've been a huge advocate for the TP 2.0 preamp. I also know the cap rolling that you've done. I have a lot of respect for the V-Cap and so I also tried a V-Cap bypass on the Hovlands of the 2.0. I found as you did and also more noise from the V-Cap bypass. It stuck me as ironic, however, that Joseph uses a cap bypass on the 2.1. It got me thinking wondering what a V-Cap bypass would sound like on the 2.1 as opposed to the Solen. Sang |
My post somehow got moved under Victor's reply, making mine look moot, otherwise, my *confusion part* would never have been mentioned ! I should have known that tube selection (different gain issues) has a big influence and not everyone is running the same quads. Victor, I KNEW the power supply would be a large part of the upgrade, will the new two-chassis preamp have a tube regulated power supply ? I like this design idea (and the point-to-point wiring) it would seem to isolate any further noise issues, however, an umbilical cord and extra power cord gets thrown into the mix. |
Here is an e-mail response from Victor to a question I asked him regarding a few things: "We voice changes to Joseph's components whenever we can or feel we need to over three speaker systems--Joseph's Sophias, Cedar's Coincidence, and my ESS Transars. When Joseph and I A-B'ed the new caps vs the Hovlands on the 2.1 through Joseph's Wilson Sophias, we felt the Hovlands had a narrower bandwidth (less top and bottom and a bit more forward in the midrange), were definitely less open (that is, more compressed), and less transparent (more veiled). Because they captured musical texture and harmonics less well and the attacks were less clear, the Hovlands were smoother sounding, but to our ears at a very great cost. Joseph visited Cedar and they conducted an A-B of the new changes to the 2.1 (minus the later power supply changes) vs the equivalent 2.0. Cedar and Joseph both felt the new caps etc. made a dramatic improvement over the old. Had the changes been felt to be subtler, we would have voiced over my speakers to confirm, but the feeling of all of us over the two speaker systems was that the improvement was dramatic and not subtle. Joseph's Sophias and Cedar's Consonance speakers are three ways. We prefer to voice with three ways because of the inherent limitations of two ways. Designing a two way speaker is very difficult because the crossover point is usually at or near the point at which the ear is most sensitive--1000 Hz-2500 Hz. This means phase anomalies play a critical role, and also this is the point at which woofers sometimes become a little more ragged and tweeters are operating at the limits of their low frequency range. To minimize the possiblity of nasal elements occuring when the human voice is played, two way speaker designers often design their crossovers to slightly de-emphasize these frequencies--not greatly but slightly, maybe a couple of dB. The old Advent speakers which were such popular best sellers, had a very pronounced but narrow hole in the midrange at the crossover point of a few dB. But the designers counted on the human ear's ability to fill in gaps to compensate for this. (I enclose an essay I wrote for Joseph on Audio Listening which touches on this phenomenon.) Nevertheless if one compared an Advent with a quality three way speaker, one could distinctly hear the hole in the midrange at about 1500 Hz. You refer to the "breath of life" in your posts. Much goes into the "breath of life" but certainly midrange "presence" is a significant component of it. If you have a two way speaker, and if it, as do so many, has a slight dip in the midrange (not a great dip, just a modest carefully contoured depression along those critical frequencies to prevent any hint of honkiness or a nasal quality to vocals), you might welcome the Hovlands slight midrange emphasis--more than welcome it, need it to give you that "presence" so much a part of the breath of life. Having committed irrevocably to the new caps, we now needed to listen very, very carefully to what we had now created. This led to our feeling that the extended frequency response of the new caps was exposing high output breakup at crescendoes. To counteract this, we made the power supply changes that increased the voltage. The result of these changes was to increase dramatic contrasts, to supply extra reserves of power when crescendoes occurred, and thus to end the high output break up which we had found objectionable. It also had the effect of "softening" or "subduing" the high end and with it the objectionable edginess, and to all our ears it did this without rolling off the high end. What I'm trying to convey is that it is common for even careful listeners to confuse the added brightness caused by various forms of ringing and loss of high frequency control with extended bandwidth. We did not alter the bandwidth, or the frequency response, only the break up and edginess, but subjectively to listeners who are noticing this subliminally, this comes through as a softer or subdued top end. The "warmth" or "darkness" you hear is not in the caps you mention, but inherent in the power supply changes. To get back to the old TP 2.0n, you would need to sacrifice all the gains of the power supply mod, which gains are extensive in our opinion. Changing the value of those caps will not do it. I will ask Joseph if there is a simple way to add a little emphasis to your top end. Meanwhile, please give us a chance to think through these issues before you make any changes to the unit. Despite our asking you not to make changes, it seems you made changes and could not wait until we told you how to make them in a way that did not affect the traces. Sherod, we try to respond as rapidly as we can, and I think we do a pretty good job. I don't think from the time you put your last question re the Hovlands to us until we responded was even five days. That shouldn't be too long to wait. We will try to respond to this new request as soon as we can, but what you want to accomplish is not easy because so many elements went into the changes you hear. Isolating one from the other is not easy. We will try to have an answer for you within a few days. If you want to post any part of this answer on the Discussion Forum, feel free to do so." |
| Post removed |
Just to keep things into perspective, I am posting my initial e-mail to Victor to which Victor responded in the post I made above: Victor, When Joseph initially tried these new output caps and found that he liked them, I'm trying to put things into perspective: at this point you both decided that you liked them. Did you decide then that the power supply needed to be improved to accommodate the new caps or you just wanted to make the power supply larger to improve the preamp in general? I'm trying to figure out at what point did you decide to make a change to the new 2.1 version and why. I'm curious what you said on your recent post on the Audiogon thread about when the power supply was increased from 100V to 140V you noticed increased dynamic swings, yet the top end became soft. I'm trying to understand what this "softness" means. I never felt that the top end was ever soft in my 2.0n. Also, I noticed that on the mainboard with the tubes, in the front of the board are four electrolytic caps. Next to these are smaller film caps. As I recall, the value on the 2.0n smaller caps were .22uf, and they are now .47uf. Can you tell me what this cap value change did to the circuit? The reason I'm asking is that now that I've reverted back to the solo Hovlands by themselves in the outputs, I'm getting a little darker or warmer sound than before. I'm trying to figure out what in the upgrade could be causing this. Basically ,in a nutshell, what I'm trying to do is revert back to the 2.0n which I had before Joseph made his upgrades yet keep key things that would benefit the original configuration. Please be rest assured that I don't intend to make changes to the preamp that would cause damage to the traces to void any warrantee. I'm grateful that Joseph repaired some traces for me during his upgrades as an act of goodwill. Thanks for your help. Best, Sherod |
Stltrains, Thanks to RX8man who introduced the idea to add this to Joseph's preamp. Washers are used as a barrier between the board and the screw plate. In my set up, I have an isolation board which takes out subfrequency noise and under the tube board I floated it on three points and stabilized it with tape on each side. I believe the washers can be supplied by Rx8man as well. ******************* Victor, does the in-line AC filter serve as part of the grounding for the original AH preamp? |
Thanks for the mention La45 ! My kit contains the (slightly) longer screws to match the butyl washers. I hope Victor sees my last post, otherwise I'll contact him directly about my two questions. I'm really curious of his mention of a two-chassis preamp and point-to-point wiring, no boards to float and hopefully ?? a tube regulated power supply, how killer this would sound ! In the very begining, I called Joseph and asked what he thought of a separate power supply, but so much has been happening since that time, he may have forgotten. Think about it kids, an all-out-assault preamp effort from Joseph ?? As good as the AH 2.0 and 2.1 are, this thing (maybe call it a 2.2) ? could literally smoke any and all competition in its path (probably still very affordable too) Sherod, you and I would have to keep our curious hands off the insides !! I can't wait to hear of an actual prototype, this could be very exciting. |
I am thinking of trying a tube amp again and am considering a high powered PP or SET. Wonder how long this amp will take to bring to market? Like my Belles SS amp to be sure, but a recent Agon purchase has given me the tube bug again. I purchased a EL84 triode amp, 7 watts, made by Vu of Deja Vu audio. It is made with vintage transformers and high quality parts. It is a replica of a nice vintage tube amp from the 50's. Wow, does this amp sound wonderful. Yes, I need more power when I want to play my music very loud, but this amp drives my Dali's pretty darn well. Considering an ASL AQ1009 and several Vac amps. Perhaps even an ASL Hurricane. Bill |
Bill, You may want to check into these http://www.ariaaudio.com Hybrid design, stereo upgradeable to mono versions, power to spare, on-site voicing (if desired) a trial basis and lifetime warranty. FWIW: an owner replaced a pair of Darts with the WT350 monos and preferred them to a pair of Karan 1200s. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Super review in my opinion from a respected and fine web site. I like the short but well put informed reviews. It also seems that AHs interconnects and power cords are in favor at 10 audio. Congratulations Joseph and Victor and all at Audio Horizons for a positive review of your gear. I hope more are to come. Also thanks all for your input on balanced ics. I should have a balanced ic from Joseph this week to hear for my self. |
Well guys i took the good advice and played with moving my speakers. Yes it made my sound better by a wide margin. Before the move my speakers were approx. 7 feet apart. Towed in some what. Now they are spread out a few more inches and just barley towed in. For those who have not tried this with the addition of 2.1 do your self a favor and do it. On another front the wife has had it with the carpet in our great room and we are going with wood. I am hoping for the best for not losing the find sound i am getting now. We bought a large 8X10 area rug for between the seats and speakers. I guess thats progress. Wishing all the best to you guys and gals... |
Well, I just had to get in that 700th post. We're slowly gaining on the Supratek thread. I am, unfortunately, without my main system for a few weeks, but I'm hoping to have it up and running and enjoying my music once again soon. I have e-mailed Victor privately to congratulate them on the new review of the line stage and phono section. I am particularly anxious to read the upcoming review from the Dagogo site. I hope that Victor will keep us abreast of this review as well as Joseph's progress with his new amp. |
