Also, some of the oddball power transistors that NP in his FW business likes to play with are unusual compared to typical power transistors in that they act more like voltage gain devices than like current gain devices. Thus not so good at driving a typical 3- or 4-way crossover. (I hate multi-way passive crossovers in speakers. I think they are a major source of SQ degradation.)
|
I strongly doubt that "many thousands" of the very expensive higher power Pass amplifiers are sold, if you're speaking of a single model. If you take total production over the last years, maybe. Otherwise, I agree.
Johnss, No one I know has ever heard the ART1000. Have you?
|
Sure. The "Pass" amplifiers ought to be superior to the FW amplifiers, based on the vast differences in cost. You don't say what was the power rating of the FW. I wonder because I would bet that the sensitivity of the Magicos is over-rated, meaning I would bet they are less efficient than advertised. Moreover, I would bet they have impedance issues around the many crossover points which would affect a low power amp more than more powerful ones. Which FW amp was it; do you recall?
|
It may have seemed that I was touting the ART7 as the "best" cartridge. I was merely bringing it up as a very very good cartridge for relatively modest cost. I would hazard a guess that it is competitive with others that cost up to $5K, which was the upper limit for the OP, I think. Also, I am resistant to the notion that you always get what you pay for, and nothing more, in audio equipment. I think sometimes very expensive equipment can fall short of one's personal expectations. On the other hand, you can put a modest priced cartridge into a fine tonearm and be very pleasantly surprised. I also keep in my mind that I would be using the potentially $10,000-cartridge in many cases to play used LPs that I bought for $5 to $10 with an unknown prior history. (Yes, I only buy mint used LPs with zero visible blemishes, and I often buy new releases, but still... About a third of my LP collection is made up of records I bought new over the course of time since the mid-60s. The rest is either from the collection of my close friend, who bought all his LPs new, or used LPs that I bought in Tokyo or at various audio shows. I don't buy from eBay or from second hand stores.)
Raul, you cannot really say you've heard THE First Watt amplifier, since there are many different versions with different intended uses. In some cases, he is experimenting and puts out the product for others to critique. As NP says, it's his playground.
Also, I have no doubts that the Etna is good, should be superior to the ART7 based on cost alone.
|
I guess one can argue both pro and con on the comparison between "modern" and "vintage" gear, by one's selection of products to argue about. Surely I would not disagree that there is some very expensive modern junk out there. In vintage gear, the greatest values may be found in speakers, I think, such as the Quad 57 and KLH 9 ESLs, for two examples. Then there are the vintage direct drive turntables, which have come into vogue partly because there are so few modern direct drive turntables from which to choose, and the ones we do have are very expensive. It's selective. But I won't concede that the 1970s and 80s vintage Japanese amplifiers and phono stages have anything special to offer us in the here and now. They're cool and collectible, but that's about it.
I have heard older Pass solid state amplifiers, and they are fine. I have also heard First Watt amplifiers and like them as well, on efficient speakers. But I would not have thought that the latest Pass amplifiers were as flawed as you say. If so, that's too bad, because Mr Pass knows more about solid state circuits than most and can apparently do whatever he wants.
|
Pani, We're far apart if you admire old Marantz, Denon, Yamaha, McIntosh, Quad solid state electronics compared to recent vintage (last 10 years, for an example). There have been significant advances in transistor technology since the 70s and 80s, and those old circuits are needlessly complex as well (especially the Japanese stuff), with electrolytics and cheap switches in the signal path, here and there. Plus, we have much better parts these days, even if they're sometimes poorly applied. But that's OK. I'd look at the work of Nelson Pass as an example of advanced thinking.
|
I think the best modern designs blow away the so-called "classics", for frequency response, neutrality, dynamics, you-name-it. Have you ever heard a Marantz 7C preamplifier in its original form, or the Marantz and McIntosh amplifiers that are so adored and that still bring prices in the 5-figure category? How about a Phase Linear or SAE amplifier, or the Harmon-Kardon SS preamplifier that HP once declared to be the best available (back in the 70s)? I've owned some of the former group of tube gear, and they are massively colored, overly warm, with muddy bass response, etc. The solid state stuff had different issues but was also awful by modern standards. Anyway, we can agree to disagree.
Have you gone ahead with your plan to purchase the EMT phono stage?
|
Raul, Your post is very interesting to me, because I have always wondered whether you can get your money's worth in the $10K and up price range. You apparently think the answer is yes, but for a very limited few cartridges that you named. As you know, there are many others in the same price range. Have you sampled some ultra-expensive cartridges that don't impress? My neighbor who lives only a few hundred yards away has a very nice system that I have heard many, many times. I believe I have heard an Etna and one of the very costly Clearaudio cartridges at his house, in a Durand Telos tonearm and lately in a top line Schroeder tonearm on his Doehmann turntable (which I rank very highly). I wasn't blown away by any of his very expensive cartridges, but maybe that is partly because I am not a big fan of his current speakers. I far prefer the sound I get at my house from either of my two systems with at least 3 or 3 of my own cartridges. Which goes to show you.... Something.
|
Pani, First of all, I do apologize if you felt insulted by my mention of your proclivities. I meant no slur but was trying to use you as an example of some who like to change their gear, up and down the line, from time to time, just for the fun and interest of it. And, as I did say, there's nothing wrong with that at all. Now, here you ask for a "good tube phono stage" that is not "voiced". By this I assume you mean that you start from the position that most ARE voiced for this or that type of sound. I disagree with that general assumption, although it may be applicable in some cases. I think most designers are searching for the elusive quality of "neutral". The problem is that they cannot predict what other products will be mated to their particular phono stage. Choices made on the upstream side (the cartridge) and on the downstream side (amplifier and speakers, not to mention the room itself) will inevitably affect the sum total of how a system sounds, if you stick one phono stage into it, and then another phono stage is substituted, while keeping everything else constant. You can easily end up chasing your tail. If you want a phono stage with no personality of its own, on average you might prefer solid state. On the other hand, some solid state phonos fail to deliver what some of the better tube phonos do best. You may have to spend large bucks for a solid state phono that can do it all and do it well. You'll have to judge for yourself. I am not saying here that SS is better than tubes or vice-versa, in case anyone takes offense.
Chak, I think I could agree that there may be an Audio Technica "house sound". I haven't really heard enough of their product line to be absolutely sure of that, but you do profess to love the ATML180 and 170 (forgive me for any error in the alphanumeric designation, but you know the ones I mean). And I guess you owned an AT2000 MC and sold it. But how can you know how the ART9 and ART7 sound just from those experiences? In particular, there is no reason to assume the 7 and 9 sound no better than the 2000, which you apparently did not love. I can't speak about the ART9, because I have never heard it, but my ART7 was at first a bit too "clinical" sounding for my tastes, in my Beveridge system. But it did exhibit an extended bass response and exceptional detail retrieval. It takes me a long time to break in new cartridges, because I am constantly flitting around with my different turntables and other cartridges, but finally in the last few hours of use my ART7 seems to have "broken in", in that it has begun to be able to convey the emotions of music while still revealing inner detail and a great bass response (qualities that it always did have). I think it's a real winner especially in its price class, and especially since that price class includes many of the great vintage MM and MI cartridges that we both appreciate. Some of the latter even cost more and are much harder to find, and when you find them you cannot be sure of condition. So, if you have enough gain, the ART7 is a worthy contender. Probably the ART9 is too.
|
If you follow Pani's posts, you might notice that he is frequently in the market for a new this or a new that. There's nothing wrong with that; it's part of the fun of the hobby for some of us, but it does suggest that Pani is on a different journey or has yet to figure out where he wants to go with his home sound. It takes decades for some of us to get there.
|
Just to correct myself: I wrote that the output of the ART7 is 0.24mV. After I posted, some others mentioned the output at 0.12mV. Those persons are correct; the output is 0.12mV, not 0.24mV. Sorry about that. However, for what it's worth, I run mine through the MC inputs of a Manley Steelhead, using the 65db gain setting. The linestage of the Steelhead adds no additional gain, so 65db is all there is, and I have enough output to drive my Beveridge amplifiers as loud as I might ever want, or louder. For comparison, my Ortofon MC2000 with a stated output of .05mV cannot cut the mustard in this same system; the gain is inadequate. (I would need a SUT into the MM inputs.) Results depend not only upon phono and linestage gain but also upon the input sensitivity of the amplifier and the efficiency of the speakers. For each of us, the gain requirement at the input phono stage end can be quite different when you crank in those other factors.
Raul, isn't the Lyra Etna a very expensive cartridge, well above $5K? I'm sure it's quite good.
|
The AT ART7 gets very little mention here and elsewhere. I own one and I like it very much. I have never heard an ART9, so I am not able to say that the 7 is better or worse, but it is hard to beat the ART7 even with very much more expensive LOMC cartridges (Koetsu, ZYX, and Ortofon at my house). That’s the thing about the ART7; it has a low output of 0.24mV, so you need a high gain phono or a SUT into an MM phono. The ART9 is less fussy because more gain. If we’re judging cartridges based on how they are made, which I am loathe to do, the 7 may be superior to the 9 in that it uses an amorphous core coil structure, whereas the 9 is conventional. Strangely, the 7 is a bit less expensive than the 9. Strange because the amorphous core would add cost. Further, the low output suggests that the 7 may have lower moving mass than the 9. That's difficult to say for sure because of the factor of the amorphous core used in its coil, which might also reduce generator output.
By the way, isn't the AT20SLa a non-select version of the AT20SS? In other words, the 20SS ought on principle to outperform the 20SLa. But if you crank in the age of these cartridges and the differing histories of previous use and users, all bets like that are off.
|
Your “through the roof” expectation bias alone might be enough to make you happy with almost any cartridge that you pay from $2000-$5000 for. On the other hand, you might find that a particular cartridge in that price range is not as good as the art9, if you are able to be honest with yourself. It’s a crapshoot, since ultimately you are the only one who can make the judgment.
|
