Ozzy,
I'm not sure how Zu cables are pertinent to this thread but I certainly don't get upset over anything audio. All cables are pretty much fixed parametric equalizers so they're all flawed from a fidelity standpoint. We each just select the least deleterious that also suit our sense of musical rightness, given the rest of the gear connected. Soft annealed silver should sound quite good in the right context. If you used Zu Varial & Ibis in the past, they are by both materials and geometry exceedingly revealing. In some uses too much so for some people with some associated gear. What works for you is what you should have. 5N soft silver ought to be great.
I am looking forward to hearing a QOL.
Phil |
Since the matter of cable has come up, I though I would put in my 2 cents: 1)if you use the same interconnect in the signal path, you are probably ahead. 2) XLR is WAY better than RCA (that's why they were invented and are used in pro mics.). 3) Shorter is best. 4) Most high-end interconnects are snake oil. Start with good electricity and most of the nasties don't get in. Keep interconnects away from power cords. Speaker cables are a black art. Again, shorter is better. Phil is correct about the subjective corruption of the signal by all interconnects; however, careful selection can create a cancellation effect, where weaknesses and strengths cancel each other out. |
Ozzy, glad you like your qol unit. My point about burn in was that the difference is small compared to the other factors such as speaker tow in and placement. I recently swapped a V-Ray II out and put in Shunyatas Triton. It right out of box seemed bright and non fluid. It took pretty much the recommended 200 hrs. to start singing and finally pass the V-RayII in sound quality. The qol right away was positve and only got better with time. That was my point and not to wait and start later. Marc |
Ozzy, forgot to say I have a 1amp Supreme fuse I will exchange for the one with unit. I will do a before and after and will report if any or much diference |
213cobra,Phil, My comments about the Zu Cable were to show that the Zu owner has HIS OPINION of the Qol unit, and I'm also sure he thinks his Variel and Ibis cables are one of the best cables.
But, in MY OPINION they were bested by my inexpensive DIY cables big time.
Again, different tastes, systems, and ears.
Don't pay attention to the so-called experts. Quite frankly I and others posting about the Qol unit are only sharing our experience. The Qol really needs to be heard in YOUR system,
Marc777 I agree with you about the burn(break) in. I think the unit is smoothing out ever so nicely. I have the original gold HIFI tuning fuse in mine. I would be interested in how the Supreme works. |
Ozzy, you are correct. It has to be heard in the system you know best. All of us know that swapping out or adding components is really the manipulation of checks and balances. I would like to hear more about designer fuses: I have hi fi tuning fuses in just about all my components with good results. I still have the original fuse in the Qol. Something else: I have rear channels in my setup (they are 24 ft. behind the listener). The way I set up the Qol is to feed my rear channel decoder (SDP1 made by Audio Research) with the second output of the Qol. I have never seen the ambient channels blend into the room in this way. I mentioned this setup to Larry Kay et al., and they had not tried it. |
Preale, Wow, I have to try that. Right now I am using the second output for my 2 JL Audio powered subs.
But I will say this,I watched the movie "The Thing 2011" in stereo using my 2 channel rig and there was so much detail and wallop to the movie it was quite impressive. The Qol probaly should have been a multichannel device. Probably in version 2.0 |
My advice: don't waste the output on the sub, since directionality is so little in low frequencies. I am running my sub directly out of the preamp. I think that you are correct is stating that the Qol should have been a multichannel device. Remember, the volume level on the rear channels will have to be bigger for balance. You will see that the info coming out of the surround channels is quite different and much more realistic. |
Preale, I agree about subs. I tried my JL-113s both ways, but preferred subs driven from preamp. This weekend I will test supreme fuse and give feedback to group. |
Preale, With only an analog input on the Qol, how are you driving the rear channels? |
The Audio Research SDP1 operates as a matrix unit in the analog mode. Ordinarily, you would take a preamp output and connect it to the SDP input. I used the second output of the Qol and put it into the input of the SDP. I am not using the front channel outputs of the SDP, but taking the Output 1 of the Qol straight to the basic amp. In other words, I am not taking the front output from the SDA1, just the rear channels.
This setup produces a believable illusion, and all the levels are controlled by the main preamp.
As an aside, I would say that I have been entering into all kinds of hi fi discussions on the net, and this is the first one where all participants are helping each other with a new, untried product. I am sure that the usual prejudices of orthodoxy will eventually creep in. I have already gotten some flack from the purists at the Sound Lab Owner's Group, where I first brought up the topic of Qol. |
Preale: Like someone said earlier.. "stereo is also just an effect". That's so true, you have 2 speakers trying to create the illusion of the room. So now the QOL is also an effect, and apparently doing a nice job by adding to the 2 channel setup. I would love to hear it, but I wouldn't order one for the 30 day trial as I know it would go back because I can't afford it. I'm going to AXPONA in Jacksonville, FL in March and I hope to hear one there. |
Speaking of Stereo and Qol in the same topic and the anticipation of naysayers...here is a hilarious video that was brought to my attention and I think it is quite appropriate for this topic of emerging technologies. Enjoy! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzi75bhOcI
- |
Great video. Actually, I was compelled to use monaural LP's when I first started teaching music at UCLA. The then Chairman of the Dept.thought that the sound was more "honest." (of course, he wore two hearing aids.). |
I'm convinced. Send the demonly QOL back, or better yet throw it on a bonfire. Oh wait... todays kids don't even have normal ears. They have big holes, or spikes in them. Maybe a QOL is just what they need. I'm not sure now... I will write my congressman. They will guide me correctly. |
Great Video. "I'm sticking with Mono" |
All right!!! Lets go back to 78's, the first direct to disk. I even have an Edison cylinder player from 1903. I plan to listen to Wagner's Ring of the Nibelungs tonight. |
Marc777, So how did the Supreme fuse work out? |
Ozzy, I will get to to it this weekend. I have a chance to compare my signal cables against the latest cables by Shunyata that unexpectedly came in Thursday on loan. I was told they need 4 or 5 days burn-in and I try not to change 2 things at once so I can be sure of effect. I am curious myself and will tell what I hear. Marc |
Ozzy, got to test fuse in qol last night and was pleased immediately with across the board improvement, especially at high volume. Just as in the ARC preamp and amp the highs are sweeter and music more fluid. Leading edge of instruments are easier to identify. These are not night and day, but a nice improvement over standard fuses. |
What model of Supreme fuse did you use (amperage and slow blow vs. fast blow)? |
Preale, 3AG 250v 1A slo-blo as per Larry Kay. |
Its a 1 Amp slow blow. The numbers are a bit confusing. |
I know that the polarity of these things is critical. There is usually an arrow: does it point in or out? I remember having to fuss with this on my EMM Labs digital setup. |
Preale, during testing of fuse I tried putting fuse in both ways and preferred the arrow pointing away from unit. This also was the way the arrow pointed in my ARC LS-27 and ARC D-450 amp after testing both ways. I would be curious to see if you concur. |
I ordered the fuse this morning (small 3AG 250V 1 amp). When it arrives, and after a few days break in, I will report. Meanwhile the Qol keeps getting better. I now think that an excess of 200hrs. is minimum. Also, the use of XLR interconnects is essential. I don't know what speakers all of you are using, but this unit seems to work particularly well with electrostatics. I have it in the sound system that uses Sound Lab M-1 PX's. |
Preale, I agree, all equipment including qol need to burn in to get optimum sound reproduction. I just think the burn in is a small factor with the qol unit compared to speaker and system adjustment. Right out of the box the qol was positive and only got better. What has surprised me is how some units and cables absolutely make your ears hurt and can take 200 to 600+ hrs. to come on song. The Shunyata Triton and their cables take 200 hrs to sound good with more to come. The ARC preamp and amp took 200+hrs.to sound fair and 600+ to come on song. When listening to all these early, before burn in, hurt my ears and made me question my purchases. I almost traded amp as it took the longest, but time transformed the sound in ways I had never experienced or expected. That to me is burn in that is extremely relative and can effect whether you want to purchase something or not. With the qol I liked right away then started falling in love. |
Without a doubt, the Hi Fi tuning fuse is worth the money. I had some delay, because I ordered the wrong size. It seems to smooth out the sound and remove a small amount of grit. |
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/bsgtech/1.html |
Preale, I have the regular version of the HIFI Tuning fuse in mine. I'm going to get a Supreme.
Oddiophool, the 6 moons review was poorly written, I couldnÂ’t tell if they liked it or not.
Suffice to say I find all their reviews too flowery with little substance. The Qol needs to be listened with the volume left alone instead of constantly fiddling with it like they did in the review. The dynamics is one of its main virtues.
Plus they tried it in so many systems with so many different listeners. Terrible way to do an analyis. |
I just read the review, which taught me more about frying eggs than anything else. Something alluded to in a letter in this month's Absolute Sound indicates that there is an increase in forwardness of the image. In my system (Sound Lab M-1 PX electrostats) the Qol seems to stabilize the image in speakers that often sound too recessed under normal circumstances. In the 6 moons article manufacturers reply, Larry Kay is correct when he states that the variability is in the recordings. We all have noticed the annoying lack of consistency in R-L balance in any number of recordings, just to name one issue. I agree with Oddiophool: put the Qol in one system and live with it. After about two months with the unit I have found that, in general, it makes the sound more cohesive with little or no loss of transparency. I would like to have heard a comparison of the effect of Qol on the Duntech Sovereigns vs. the Beveridge electrostats. |
Anyone else try out the Qol ? |
I certainly do. For us it is all it has been described as. Our system never sounded closer to the live event. No loss of transparency that we can detect.
Instaled between pre and Amp. The Qol reqiured over 300 hours to sound its best. No fuses yet, just a Triode Wire Labs AC cord did the trick.
Now you gents that have not heard one in YOUR system get over the marketing nonsense and prose. Gets one interested, that is the whole idea. Next would be demo one. Then and then only make up your mind. really that simple.
In all fairness to any Manf listening is the only way to tell. One may feel that the marketing prose is a bit much or the claims made difficult to believe. Howeve boys proof is in da pudding.
I would more than happy to demo the Qol in anyones home in the NY tri State area.
now what we heard. A more realistic sized soundstage. not overblown, but larger. height of soundstage was really exposed. Tonality did not change for the worse, actually improved. Soundstage came forward and deeper with greated width as well. No loss of clarity when in. the bypass swith is moot really. no need for it. Once Qol is engaged unless you play a worn or scratched LP just no need.
As far as tweeking goes a Triode Wire Lab 8ga PC worked well for us. Have not tried fuse . Running single ended connection not balanced. Tried balanced in other systems and feel there may be an advantage in sonics bt jury is still out.
As an aside so far every buddy whom has heard this in their system bought one.
Really what do have to lose, try one. My bet it is a keeper. Until then chill. |
Almost forgot. The balance thing is recording dependant. A balance control really helps out. Or sometimes if one uses tubes that one is stronger than the other which adds to the inferior recording.
As far as fowardness is concerned, depends on recording as well.
Living with Qol now for over 8 months and hearing it numerous systems, all I can say is it is not going anywhere. One would have to rip it out of my dead cold hands. |
Pipedream, Glad you are enjoying the Qol. I have had mine for about 2-3 months. I leave the Qol engaged all the time too. My comments on this thread show how much I appreciate the Qol.
I have a very difficult time reading some of the negative comments, especially those from people who have never actually tried one. The comment about lack of transparency and clarity troubles me because I just don't know how anyone could state that, in my opinion it is just the opposite.
Now because the Qol improves the dynamics of the instruments, voices etc, it may seem at times that certain instruments, staging or voices overwhelm other instruments, staging or voices. Perhaps that is why some say there is a loss of clarity. But it sounds right to me, just like live music sounds.
I have only used my Qol with the balanced connections and I am using the same interconnects throughout my 2 channel system.
A good power cord is a plus, I'm using a Synergistic Research Tesla 2 because it was available and all my other power cables are Synergistic Research Tesla series. |
I would agree with all about having a good power cord. As usual, anything in the analogue mode picks up interference. The "loss of clarity" occasionally mentioned, I think, is the removal of that etched quality found in many studio recordings. What the Qol does is create a sense of air around the instruments and voices. I would be interested in feedback from anyone using full range electrostatic speakers in the system. With my big Sound Labs I can finally appreciate the true accuracy of sound, along with a sense of liveness. Because my listening area is so big (75 ft. total), I have back channels (some 25 ft. behind listener). I have them fed also with the Qol. Using an Audio Research SPD1 for the rear, the out of phase information is more realistically conveyed. I also think that with the Qol it is easier to reproduce real concert levels (I am talking about real, classical music concerts where the sound comes only from instruments and voices without sound reinforcement ala rock and other pop). |
BTW guys where do you have the Qol installed ? Before or after the Preamp. In our situation it is after the preamp since we use a Phono/pre combo.
At first qol was to be installed before the Preamp, then an addendum was issued by BSG suggesting after the preamp.
BTW it likes footers as well. Using ebony cones with great affect. So experiment away dear chaps and always have fun doing so.
|
Ok here are our findings about Qol. It takes 500 hours to sound its best. That is when we detected so more changing of sound. Around 500 not exactly. Powercords do make a difference as well as power correction devices[ Uberbuss ].
Footers too contribute to more focused bass and tighter images. not to say as is is bad, just that with better.
We have tried, Ebony cones, Soundfusion, Pon -tunes, Ayre wood blocks and brass cones so far [ we like the Ayre blocks ]. All different results. realy is system dependant. Basically a tone control footer wise.
Let ya know how the "supreme" HIFI Tuning fuse works out for us. last but not least , leave it on 24/7 makes a difference. |
I concur with everything Pipedream says. My unit has been used over 600 hours, and it is finally smoothed out (I leave the unit on 24/7 and have used the Isotek burn in CD a few times over the period). One last thing: using the XLR output for the main channels also really helps, especially if the source-to preamp and preamp to amp connections are balanced. Since my whole front end is on an isolated platform, a setup like that improves the sound of any component. An added bonus is when you use a classic, analogue FM tuner like the McIntosh MR 78 or Marantz 10B tube tuner as a source. I am sure the result is euphonic, but addicting. |
Hey guys if you are using the Qol after the preamp, please try after source instead. Since I do not have a dedicated phonostage we placed the Qol after the preamp.
A buddy brought over his phonostage so we decided to listen both ways. We really liked the presentaion after the source.
I will keep our findings secret until you try and tell us what you hear.
Received the fuse a HiFI Tuning supreme. Expensive little sucker, but man O man it does make a difference for the good.
Balanced if you can will also add to the pleasure. also if you have the original version before the top cover change, dampen the top cover inside with either 3M sheets or dynamat.
Have fun trying and report back. |
Dear Pipedream,
Been reading our posts regarding the QOL. I have one on trial and have broken it in over 250hrs. I was just about to send it back today when I remembered your post regarding trying it after the source. I did that and it completely sounded much better than after the preamp. I am still not 100% for keeping it. It does change the sound for the better though. I ordered the Hi-fi supreme fuse for the unit. Haven't totally decided to keep unit. To me it sound so much better after the source. thanks Ron |
After over 400 hours of break-in time and multiple listening sessions with my fellow audiopihles, I decided to trun back the unit. I informed the dealer I wanted to return the unit. I noticed my anit-vibration blocks had indented the soft spongy portion of the soft rubber supporting feet. I also informed the dealer that by removing the top of the unit to find the fuse I had bent the metal tab on the the back of the top lid.. I was more that willing to pay for the "damage" ( new replacement parts). and refund the difference in cost from the original purchase price. The dealer said that BSG was sticking to their original decision as to not taking the unit back and therefore I was not eligable for any refund. By the letter of the "law" BSG is correct. In the spirit of building a company and a reputaiton I would think they would be willing to work with their customers. What say you? |
Nope, You bent(damaged) the equipment while you were modifing the equipment. It is now yours. This is exactly why there is AudioGon used equipment ads. Best wishes in a quick sale. |
Sorry to hear of your misfortune. However it is damaged goods.
You did agree to the terms when purchased. BSG has every right to deny a return. As a new company though perception is the key. I have mixed feelings about this.
|
Bought the small Hifi Tuning Supreme fuse. It does not fit. Bummer. Is it the fuse at the IEC ?? Mine is a standard size. Is there another inside the Qol ??
|
I have both the small and big supremes. I just replaced the big one outside. If there is one inside I did not look. Maybe Larry Kay will advise. |
Thanks Preale. OK my bad need to buy large size. |
You guys should read a VERY well written review of the Qol by Wslam in the members review section.
Awesome |
